News and views of Constance Cumbey concerning "Radical Middle", New Age Movement, Communitarianism, "planetary humanism," "global governance," European Union, Javier Solana, Jeremy Rifkin, "New Age Politics," law in the USA, combined with life in general -- sometimes humorous, sometimes not!

Tuesday, January 12, 2010

"There shall be earthquakes in divers[e] places . . ." This was a significant one! I know immediate relief is needed and you should send contributions to trusted relief agencies. Reportedly, an important hospital collapsed. One more reason, literally, to jolt us out of complacency. Pun intended.

Note that in the following November 16, 2009 article, while Pope Benedict does mention global warming, he does not speculate about what the cause of global warming might be.

WE CAN FEED THE WORLD DESPITE GLOBAL WARMING

Pope Benedict XVI today told a United Nations world food summit that "the Earth can sufficiently feed all of its inhabitants" despite the "devastation" caused by global warming, and blamed the "greed" of speculators in cereals markets for aggravating world hunger.

In a speech to the opening day of the three day World Summit on Food Security organised in Rome by the UN Food and Agricultural Organisation (FAO), the Pope said that "even if there are some regions where climate change has devastated production, globally speaking there is enough food to satisfy demand now and for the foreseeable future".

He added: "These data show that there is no cause and effect relationship between population growth and hunger, and therefore is another proof of the deplorable trend to destroy food chains for profit". He condemned "greed which causes speculation to rear its head even in the marketing of cereals, as if food were to be treated just like any other commodity."

Pope Benedict criticised "those forms of aid that do grave damage to the agricultural sector" and "approaches to food production that are geared solely towards consumption and lack a wider perspective." He also warned against resignation or indifference towards the problem of world hunger.

He said there was a "tendency to view hunger as structural, an integral part of the socio-political situation of the weakest countries, a matter of resigned regret, if not downright indifference. It is not so, and it must never be so."

The Pope told delegates: "The weakness of current mechanisms for food security and the need to re-examine them are confirmed by the mere fact that this summit has been convoked. Even though the poorest countries are more fully integrated into the world economy than in the past, movements in international markets make them more vulnerable."

He sad that "food production methods impose upon us the need to carefully analyse the relationship between development and environmental protection.

The desire to possess and to use in an excessive and disorderly manner the resources of the planet is the number one cause of environmental damage. Environmental protection, then, is our challenge for today; to guarantee that our development proceeds harmoniously, and with respect for God's creation, and of course, in a way which safeguards the planet."

He insisted,however, that in making these remarks he was not taking a political stand. "The Church has no intention of interfering in political choices.

Respect for knowledge and scientific results, as for rational choices and decisions when made with genuine and authentic human responsibility, can come together with the overall effort to defeat famine and hunger in the world."

http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/news/world/europe/article6918668.ece

The following article is from December, 2007

THE POPE CONDEMNS THE CLIMATE CHANGE PROPHETS OF DOOM

Pope Benedict XVI has launched a surprise attack on climate change prophets of doom, warning them that any solutions to global warming must be based on firm evidence and not on dubious ideology.

The leader of more than a billion Roman Catholics suggested that fears over man-made emissions melting the ice caps and causing a wave of unprecedented disasters were nothing more than scare-mongering.

The German-born Pontiff said that while some concerns may be valid it was vital that the international community based its policies on science rather than the dogma of the environmentalist movement.

His remarks will be made in his annual message for World Peace Day on January 1, but they were released as delegates from all over the world convened on the Indonesian holiday island of Bali for UN climate change talks.The 80-year-old Pope said the world needed to care for the environment but not to the point where the welfare of animals and plants was given a greater priority than that of mankind.

Humanity today is rightly concerned about the ecological balance of tomorrow," he said in the message entitled "The Human Family, A Community of Peace"."It is important for assessments in this regard to be carried out prudently, in dialogue with experts and people of wisdom, uninhibited by ideological pressure to draw hasty conclusions, and above all with the aim of reaching agreement on a model of sustainable development capable of ensuring the well-being of all while respecting environmental balances."If the protection of the environment involves costs, they should be justly distributed, taking due account of the different levels of development of various countries and the need for solidarity with future generations.

Prudence does not mean failing to accept responsibilities and postponing decisions; it means being committed to making joint decisions after pondering responsibly the road to be taken."Efforts to protect the environment should seek "agreement on a model of sustainable development capable of ensuring the well-being of all while respecting environmental balances", the Pope said.

He added that to further the cause of world peace it was sensible for nations to "choose the path of dialogue rather than the path of unilateral decisions" in how to cooperate responsibly on conserving the planet.

The Pope's message is traditionally sent to heads of government and international organisations.

His remarks reveal that while the Pope acknowledges that problems may be associated with unbridled development and climate change, he believes the case against global warming to be over-hyped.A broad consensus is developing among the world's scientific community over the evils of climate change.But there is also an intransigent body of scientific opinion which continues to insist that industrial emissions are not to blame for the phenomenon.Such scientists point out that fluctuations in the earth's temperature are normal and can often be caused by waves of heat generated by the sun. Other critics of environmentalism have compared the movement to a burgeoning industry in its own right.In the spring, the Vatican hosted a conference on climate change that was welcomed by environmentalists.But senior cardinals close to the Vatican have since expressed doubts about a movement which has been likened by critics to be just as dogmatic in its assumptions as any religion.

In October, the Australian Cardinal George Pell, the Archbishop of Sydney, caused an outcry when he noted that the atmospheric temperature of Mars had risen by 0.5 degrees celsius."The industrial-military complex up on Mars can't be blamed for that," he said in a criticism of Australian scientists who had claimed that carbon emissions would force temperatures on earth to rise by almost five degrees by 2070 unless drastic solutions were enforced.

Acting more like a politician than a religious leader, the pope complained about the failure at the Copenhagen conference to come up with a new treaty to punish Western nations, led by the United States, that have used fossil fuels for industrial development. Referring to "the growing concern caused by economic and political resistance to combating the degradation of the environment," he said, "This problem was evident even recently, during the XV Session of the Conference of the States Parties to the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change held in Copenhagen from 7 to 18 December last. I trust that in the course of this year, first in Bonn and later in Mexico City, it will be possible to reach an agreement for effectively dealing with this question. The issue is all the more important in that the very future of some nations is at stake, particularly some island states."

The Pope, therefore, is going to use his influence to get a treaty written, passed, and imposed on the world.

For this reason I share the growing concern caused by economic and political resistance to combatting the degradation of the environment. This problem was evident even recently, during the XV Session of the Conference of the States Parties to the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change held in Copenhagen from 7 to 18 December last. I trust that in the course of this year, first in Bonn and later in Mexico City, it will be possible to reach an agreement for effectively dealing with this question. The issue is all the more important in that the very future of some nations is at stake, particularly some island states.

It is proper, however, that this concern and commitment for the environment should be situated within the larger framework of the great challenges now facing mankind. If we wish to build true peace, how can we separate, or even set at odds, the protection of the environment and the protection of human life, including the life of the unborn? It is in man’s respect for himself that his sense of responsibility for creation is shown. As Saint Thomas Aquinas has taught, man represents all that is most noble in the universe (cf. Summa Theologiae, I, q. 29, a. 3). Furthermore, as I noted during the recent FAO World Summit on Food Security, “the world has enough food for all its inhabitants” (Address of 16 November 2009, No. 2) provided that selfishness does not lead some to hoard the goods which are intended for all.

I didn't see anything in the Pope Benedict XVI's statements that would have indicated a desire to see the western nations "punished."

With regard to the Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty, it is precisely as a religious leader and not as a politician that the Pope would encourage "progressive disarmament, with a view to freeing our planet from nuclear arms."

It seems to me that no matter how many times the Pope says that he is not favoring any one political system over another, Cliff Kincaid finds a way to spin the Pope's statements to make it appear that Pope Benedict is speaking as a politician and not as a prelate.

INteresting: About the only information coming out of Haiti is from the missionaries I know or others affiliated. Troy Livesay had tweets read on ABC, CNN, Larry King. A luke Renner on phone with a Luke Renner. It shows that when information is vital they will look for information where find it. Draws attention ultimately and eventually to what these folks are doing in reaching needs as well as preaching and showing the Gospel.

Not trying to detract from the horrible quake in Haiti, but I thought every one better get a look at this.

- - - - - - -THE WHITE HOUSEOffice of the Press SecretaryFor Immediate Release January 11, 2010 EXECUTIVE ORDER ESTABLISHMENT OF THE COUNCIL OF GOVERNORS By the authority vested in me as President by theConstitution and the laws of the United States of America,including section 1822 of the National Defense AuthorizationAct of 2008 (Public Law 110-181), and in order to strengthenfurther the partnership between the Federal Government and Stategovernments to protect our Nation and its people and property,it is hereby ordered as follows: Section 1. Council of Governors. (a) There is established a Council of Governors (Council).The Council shall consist of 10 State Governors appointed bythe President (Members), of whom no more than five shall be ofthe same political party. The term of service for each Member appointed to serve on the Council shall be 2 years, but a Membermay be reappointed for additional terms. (b) The President shall designate two Members, whoshall not be members of the same political party, to serve asCo-Chairs of the Council. Sec. 2. Functions. The Council shall meet at the call of the Secretary of Defense or the Co-Chairs of the Council toexchange views, information, or advice with the Secretary ofDefense; the Secretary of Homeland Security; the Assistant tothe President for Homeland Security and Counterterrorism; theAssistant to the President for Intergovernmental Affairs andPublic Engagement; the Assistant Secretary of Defense forHomeland Defense and Americas' Security Affairs; the Commander,United States Northern Command; the Chief, National GuardBureau; the Commandant of the Coast Guard; and other appropriateofficials of the Department of Homeland Security and theDepartment of Defense, and appropriate officials of otherexecutive departments or agencies as may be designated by theSecretary of Defense or the Secretary of Homeland Security.Such views, information, or advice shall concern: (a) matters involving the National Guard of the variousStates; (b) homeland defense; (c) civil support;morecont.

cont.(OVER)2(d) synchronization and integration of State and Federalmilitary activities in the United States; and (e) other matters of mutual interest pertaining toNational Guard, homeland defense, and civil support activities. Sec. 3. Administration. (a) The Secretary of Defense shall designate an ExecutiveDirector to coordinate the work of the Council. (b) Members shall serve without compensation for theirwork on the Council. However, Members shall be allowed travelexpenses, including per diem in lieu of subsistence, asauthorized by law. (c) Upon the joint request of the Co-Chairs ofthe Council, the Secretary of Defense shall, to theextent permitted by law and subject to the availability ofappropriations, provide the Council with administrative support,assignment or detail of personnel, and information as may benecessary for the performance of the Council's functions. (d) The Council may establish subcommittees of theCouncil. These subcommittees shall consist exclusively ofMembers of the Council and any designated employees of a Memberwith authority to act on the Member's behalf, as appropriate toaid the Council in carrying out its functions under this order. (e) The Council may establish a charter that is consistentwith the terms of this order to refine further its purpose,scope, and objectives and to allocate duties, as appropriate,among members. Sec. 4. Definitions. As used in this order: (a) the term "State" has the meaning provided inparagraph (15) of section 2 of the Homeland Security Act of 2002(6 U.S.C. 101(15)); and (b) the term "Governor" has the meaning provided inparagraph (5) of section 102 of the Robert T. Stafford DisasterRelief and Emergency Assistance Act (42 U.S.C. 5122(5)). Sec. 5. General Provisions. (a) Nothing in this order shall be construed to impair orotherwise affect: (1) the authority granted by law to adepartment, agency, or the head thereof; or (2) functions of the Director of the Office of Management and Budget relating to budgetary,administrative, or legislative proposals. (b) This order shall be implemented consistentwith applicable law and subject to the availability ofappropriations.more3(c) This order is not intended to, and does not, createany right or benefit, substantive or procedural, enforceable atlaw or in equity by any party against the United States, itsdepartments, agencies, or entities, its officers, employees, oragents, or any other person. BARACK OBAMA THE WHITE HOUSE,January 11, 2010.###

The Pope IS speaking as a politician. His goals are clearly earth centered. Thanks, Susanna, for posting what he said. In case you missed it, here's the translation:

"the Earth can sufficiently feed all of its inhabitants"

Translation.....as long as we have the proper global political controls....

"The weakness of current mechanisms for food security and the need to re-examine them..."

Translation....a stronger global control mechanism needs to be initiated...

"The desire to possess and to use in an excessive and disorderly manner the resources of the planet is the number one cause of environmental damage."

Tranlation....see Avatar, the movie....the mindset.

"Respect for knowledge and scientific results, as for rational choices and decisions when made with genuine and authentic human responsibility, can come together with the overall effort to defeat famine and hunger in the world." .....and this...."The German-born Pontiff said that while some concerns may be valid it was vital that the international community based its policies on science rather than the dogma of the environmentalist movement."

Translation....Yea, as I walk through the valley of propaganda, I will fear no evil, for just as Obama declared in his inaugural address, we will elevate science to it's 'rightful place', and by so doing, we will eliminate all the plagues of the world, starting with ignorance and war, and culminating in the defeat of the twin beasts famine and hunger.

Yes, science has established the carrying capacity of the planet, somewhere around 2 billion.

From the video I am seeing coming out of there is certainly looks like many areas are totally devastated. The world is a mess, and the prayer list will be long tonight. I have had a horrendous day on a personal level and I believe it is time for me to hit the reset button and attempt to start fresh tommorow.

Thanks JD for that important information about the Council of Governors Obama is forming. He really is reaching out for power. It is not his role or the role of the Federal government to organize the states as a group operating under the authority of the Federal government.

To add into the endtimes scenario here: Today, WND.com has an article about China and the Middle East. A move for the fulfillment of the part of the "kings of the east" in bible prophecy. The timing of this, together with all that is happening on the European front, the acceleration of talks of "world governance", "earthquakes in divers places", and the rest, how can anyone doubt the authority and authenticity of the Scriptures?

Translation.....as long as we have the proper global political controls....

NO, Anonymous. That is not the translation. That is SPIN! And where is your evidence to support your opinion about what the Pope "REALLY" means???

The only reason I commented at all on Kincaid's article is because Constance ASKED me to, and I supported what I said with other articles in which the Pope very clearly, explicitly and articulately explained his views about "global warming" and the world "food shortage."

In case YOU missed it, the translation - to be found in the texts themselves - is that the earth can feed all of its inhabitants, etc. as long as those whose greed (avarice/covetousness) and lust for political power ( whether communist or capitalist) does not include monopolizing the world's food supply and making its distribution contingent on toeing whatever party line happens to be the "party line du jour."

In the first article I posted, the Pope is quoted as saying:

Pope Benedict XVI today told a United Nations world food summit that "the Earth can sufficiently feed all of its inhabitants" despite the "devastation" caused by global warming, and blamed the "greed" of speculators in cereals markets for aggravating world hunger....

British-born academic, journalist, activist and writer Raj Pattel,who has lived and worked in Zimbabwe, South Africa and the United States for extended periods, echoes the Pope in his new book STUFFED AND STARVED:THE HIDDEN BATTLE FOR THE WORLD FOOD SYSTEM.

In his new book Raj Patel explains the state of things today and in an April 14, 2008 statement said that what is happening in Haiti is a preview of the rest of the developing world.....because Haiti, where MUD has supplanted rice as their stable food, is more or less the "poster child"of an economy that liberalized its agricultural economy and removed the social safety nets for the poor.

Add to that the very recent earthquake, and you have the makings of the kind of suffering for which there are no words to describe it.

According to Patel, Two conditions create food riots:

-- "price shocks (and) modern development policies" (tariffs, corporate subsidies, grain reserve policies) make food unaffordable for many millions; and

-- "riots (then) happen when there are no other ways (to make) powerful people listen...." They'll continue to happen "with increasing frequency until governments realize that food isn't a mere commodity, it's a human right."

As hard as it is to believe, some farmers have actually been discouraged from growing crops by way of agricultural subsidies in order to keep food prices up for the benefit of futures market speculators.

PAYING FARMERS NOT TO GROW FOOD WHILE OTHERS STARVE FOR THE SAKE OF FINANCIAL GAIN IS IMMORAL!!!!

When food prices were rising, there was much talk of the shifts in demand that were causing this trend. President Bush joined those who decided that this reflected the increased demand from China and India as their per capita incomes grew. This was a ludicrous argument because food consumption has actually declined in both countries. Both economies have shown even sharper declines in per capita food intake despite the continued presence of widespread hunger, because of increased income inequalities within these countries. In any case, that argument about more food demand from China and India quickly collapsed along with the fall in global prices. Now it is more than evident that the wild swings that have been observed in food and several commodity markets over this year have been the result of speculative forces, rather than any real changes in global demand and supply.

But despite this volatility and the recent price decline, the food crisis remains. And it does indeed reflect patterns of demand and supply - but not the ones that have been talked about. The basic problem now is not even one of absolute shortage so much as the inability to pay for food, and this problem will get worse for many developing countries and their poorer citizens.

Three problems now dominate the global food scenario. First, there is a crisis of cultivation, especially in the developing world. This is the result of two decades of policy neglect: falling public investment in agricultural research, extension and support; aggressive trade liberalisation that exposed southern farmers to heavily subsidised marketing by northern agribusinesses; financial liberalisation that reduced cultivators' access to credit and made them prey to speculative forces that also affected prices. As a result, cultivation costs have increased even in years when crop prices are falling, and cultivation is becoming unviable in many countries.

Second, this has been associated with a depression in wages in developing countries, which means that mass purchasing power did not increase even when the economies were growing. So demand for food has not gone up, simply because the poor do not have the incomes to pay for it.

P.S. Yes, science does need to be elevated to its rightful place - complete with all of the disciplines proper to its own particular sphere - in order to refute the modern-day Manichaeans - some of whom are disguised as "Christians" - who regard the material world as "evil" - contrary to the Bible which tells us that after God created the heavens and the earth, He pronounced everything as "VERY GOOD." Genesis 1:31

VATICAN CITY – "Avatar" is wooing audiences worldwide with visually dazzling landscapes and nature-loving blue creatures. But the Vatican is no easy crowd to please.

The Vatican newspaper and radio station are criticizing James Cameron's 3-D blockbuster for flirting with the idea that worship of nature can replace religion — a notion the pope has warned against. They call the movie a simplistic and sappy tale, despite its awe-inspiring special effects.....

....Most significantly, much of the Vatican criticism was directed at the movie's central theme of man vs. nature.

L'Osservatore said the film "gets bogged down by a spiritualism linked to the worship of nature." Similarly, Vatican Radio said it "cleverly winks at all those pseudo-doctrines that turn ecology into the religion of the millennium."

"Nature is no longer a creation to defend, but a divinity to worship," the radio said.

Vatican spokesman the Rev. Federico Lombardi said that while the movie reviews are just that — film criticism, not theological pronouncements — they do reflect Pope Benedict XVI's views on the dangers of turning nature into a "new divinity."...read more...

MED UNION: AHMAD MASADEH IN GOV'T, EDUCATION AND DIPLOMACY** (ANSAmed) - ROME, JANUARY 6 - The youngest ambassador that Jordan has ever had, Ahmad Khalaf Masadeh, is the candidate designated to take on the position of Mediterranean Union secretary general starting in February. Born in 1969 in Amman, Masadeh earned an honours degree in law at the University of Amman in 1991, to then go on to get his PhD in Investment Legislation and the World Trade Organisation at King's College London in 2000. Since then, Masadeh has managed to flank his career in the academic world as Assistant Professor in International Financial Law at the University of Jordan with his career as a lawyer. In his home country in 1993, he began specialising in financial law, international trade and privatisation, and has represented prestigious local agencies and international conglomerates. In 2000 he began taking an interest in politics and became a member of the Council of the World Trade Law Association, which is linked to the World Trade Organisation and specialises in relations between the latter and developing countries with especial attention given to the Middle East. Later Masadeh's career rose suddenly when - still dividing his time between political and academic commitments - in 2004 he was nominated Public Sector Reform Minister by Abdallah II. Freshly appointed, the Minister began to draw up a bold national programme for public administration reform, focusing on the human resources sector in order to improve public services. On August 1 2006, Masadeh was designated royal degree Ambassador of the Hashemite kingdom to Brussels, thereby becoming the youngest ambassador Jordan has ever had. (ANSAmed). 2010-01-06 16:48

Food is not a commodity, nor is it a "human right". Food is a necessity of life, for which we are all responsible, as individuals, to create, preserve, and protect. World governments, and big corporations, ie Monsanto, view food more as a "tool" for political control, and ultimately, a weapon. The Pope's "fatherly" words and warnings ring shallow at best, hallow at worst.

True, that was before the fall, but as a Catholic, I don't accept the doctrine of TOTAL DEPRAVITY - one of the five points of Calvinism which can be summed up in the term "Predestination.".

On the one hand, the Catholic Church maintains that man cannot "be justified before God by his own works,.. without the grace of God through Jesus Christ," thereby rejecting Pelagianism in accordance with the writings of Augustine and the Second Council of Orange (529).

However, the Catholic Church disagrees with the Protestant doctrine of total depravity, because the Catholic Church maintains man retained a free but wounded will after the Fall. Referring to the Scriptures and the Church Fathers, Catholicism views man's free will as deriving from being made in God's image. Accordingly, the Catholic Church condemned as heresy any doctrine asserting "since Adam's sin, the free will of man is lost and extinguished".

Again, Total Depravity is one of the five points of Calvinism which can be summed up in the term "Predestination."

While Catholics do not reject Predestination outright, it is nevertheless true that Catholics and some Protestants have different views of Predestination.

Would you please explain the doctrine of the "total depravity of man. Do Catholics believe in the total depravity of man doctrine. If no, could you please explain why. Thanks.

Answer

Hello and thanks for writing. Total Depravity is the belief that man's nature is completely sinful and that we are totally incapable of doing good, pleasing God or even accepting freely offered salvation. Total Depravity is based on the belief that man does not have free will. Therefore, it stands to follow- if one accepts this belief- that the only way anyone can be saved is for God to predestine that person to salvation. In the purest form of this belief system, all of mankind are predestined either to salvation or damnation based on nothing more than God's arbitrary will. The Catholic Church does not hold to this teaching.

Total Depravity is one of the Five Points of Calvinism, known by the acronym of TULIP. They are: 1. Total Depravity, 2. Unconditional Election (you're either predestined to salvation or damnation, and it has nothing to do with you personally, but is based solely on the will of God#, 3. Limited Atonement #Jesus only died for the Elect, i.e. those who were predestined to salvation#, 4. Irresistible Grace #the Elect cannot resist God's influence and ultimate destiny for their soul#, 5. Perseverance of the Saints #the Elect cannot lose their salvation#.

Now, all of these points can really be summed up in the term Predestination. Although Protestant Reformer John Calvin #1509-1564) is the most famous teacher of predestination, it is in reality a basic Christian doctrine that is mentioned in the Bible and which had been debated in the Catholic Church for many centuries before the Reformation and even afterwards. You can be certain that if an issue is debated by the greatest minds in Europe for over a millenium, and still no resolution is achieved, you're dealing with a pretty knotty conundrum. It's problematic; it's a mystery, almost like that of the Trinity. If we say that God has predestined us to salvation or damnation based solely on His arbitrary will, then you've destroyed man's free will, which is constantly affirmed throughout Scripture. In that case, we weren't responsible for the Fall, there was no need for an Atonement, and we are all basically just robots performing the actions we were programmed to perform, for some bizarre purpose. However, if you say that God did not predestine all of existence, then you take away His omniscience, which makes Him less than God, and it contradicts Scriptural references to predestination and the Elect. So what's the answer?

Well, Calvin's idea on predestination is different from that of the Catholic Church. As far as I understand it, the Catholic Church condemns Calvin's double predestination which is based solely on God's arbitrary will. The Church does teach a predestination, which is based on God's omnicient foreknowledge from the beginning of time about whether we will choose to accept or reject His salvation. I cannot begin to explain the theological nuances involved in this issue but suffice it to say that the Catholic Church's position allows for both predestination and free will.

http://www.alertnet.org/thenews/newsdesk/LDE60C1GR.htm

IMHO, it was the late great C.S. Lewis who captured the essence of the mystery best when, referring to Predestination he said:

"SEEING someone do something is not the same thing as MAKING someone do something."

Re: Food is not a commodity, nor is it a "human right". Food is a necessity of life, for which we are all responsible, as individuals, to create, preserve, and protect.

If something is a necessity of life, it is by that very fact a human right!!! According to the laws of nature!!! Which God created along WITH nature.

And you are right in saying

World governments, and big corporations, ie Monsanto, view food more as a "tool" for political control, and ultimately, a weapon.

In fact Monsanto is developing what is being called "TERMINATOR TECHNOLOGY" so that they can force farmers to buy new seeds instead of using the seeds produced by the crops they have already planted.

This is but one of the abuses of nature that the Pope has been referring to. Here is what I am talking about:

Monsanto is in the process of acquiring and patenting their newest technology, known as "Terminator Technology." This technology is currently the greatest threat to humanity. If it is used by Monsanto on a large-scale basis, it will inevitably lead to famine and starvation on a worldwide basis.

Billions of people on the planet are supported by farmers who save seeds from the crops and replant these seeds the following year. Seeds are planted. The crop is harvested. And the seeds from the harvest are replanted the following year. Most farmers cannot afford to buy new seeds every year, so collecting and replanting seeds is a crucial part of the agricultural cycle. This is the way food has been grown successfully for thousands of years.

With Monsanto's terminator technology, they will sell seeds to farmers to plant crops. But these seeds have been genetically-engineered so that when the crops are harvested, all new seeds from these crops are sterile (e.g., dead, unusable). This forces farmers to pay Monsanto every year for new seeds if they want to grow their crops....read more...

http://www.ethicalinvesting.com/monsanto/terminator.shtml

The big fear is that if the "terminator seeds" are used and somehow get mixed up with seeds that have not been genetically altered, the resulting hybrid seeds might also prove to be sterile - resulting in a disaster the likes of which we have never seen before.

Re:Will look for video and such to post. UN already has Bill there as an "envoy" and they will get there hands in this disaster, be assured of that.______________________________

FRANCE FEARS EVERYONE INSIDE UN HQ IN HAITI DEAD

13 Jan 2010 13:14:00 GMT Source: Reuters

PARIS, Jan 13 (Reuters) - French Foreign Minister Bernard Kouchner said on Wednesday he feared everyone inside the United Nations headquarters in Haiti were killed when the building was destroyed by a powerful earthquake.

"The U.N. building has collapsed and it seems that all those who were in the building, including my friend Heni Annabi who was the special envoy at the United Nations ... are dead," Kouchner told France's RTL radio.

However, he said Haiti's President Rene Preval had managed to escape his collapsing palace during the earthquake that rocked Porte-au-Prince on Tuesday.

The U.N. itself has said the people in its building were unaccounted for.

Kouchner did not specify how he had obtained the information, although he said he had spoken to France's ambassador to Haiti who reported chaos and destruction in the capital.

"Certainly I'm going to talk to President Preval, whose presidential palace also collapsed but he got out. I'm going to speak to him soon," Kouchner told RTL, according to a transcript of the interview.

The earthquake killed possibly thousands of people, as aftershocks rattled through the night and into Wednesday. (Reporting by Sophie Hardach; Editing by Louise Ireland)

VATICAN CITY (Jan. 13) -- Pope Benedict XVI met Wednesday with the woman who knocked him over during Christmas Eve Mass and forgave her, the Vatican said.

Susanna Maiolo, a 25-year-old with a history of psychiatric problems, and her family met in a private audience with the pope at the end of his general audience, Vatican spokesman the Rev. Federico Lombardi said.

Maiolo told the pontiff she was sorry for what had happened, while Benedict inquired about her health and "wanted to demonstrate his forgiveness," Lombardi said.

Maiolo, a Swiss-Italian national, jumped a security barricade in St. Peter's Basilica at the start of Christmas Eve Mass and pulled Benedict down when a security guard tackled her. The pope was unhurt.

Maiolo had tried to reach the pope in the same way during the 2008 Midnight Mass service but didn't manage to get to him. She has been treated at a clinic outside Rome since the incident.

While there, she received a visit from Benedict's personal secretary, Monsignor Georg Gaenswein, who had wanted to show the pontiff's concern for her well-being, the Vatican said.

The Vatican investigation into the incident continues, Lombardi said. A retired Vatican diplomat, French Cardinal Roger Etchegaray, fractured his hip in the commotion and had to undergo surgery.

Bringing information about Euro-Med to a more understandable level is an article over at Atlas Shrugs. http://atlasshrugs2000.typepad.com/atlas_shrugs/Pamela Geller, Front Page Interview: Muslim Europe

"...The goal of the Euro-Mediterranean cooperation is to create a new Greater European Union encompassing both Europe and North Africa, with the Mediterranean Sea becoming a domestic Eurabian sea. The goal is to establish a “comprehensive political partnership,” including a “free trade area and economic integration”; “considerably more money for the partners” (that is, more European money flowing into North Africa); and “cultural partnership” — that is, importation of Islamic culture into post-Christian Europe.

"According to the SIOE, in the Euro-Med plan, “Europe is to be Islamized. Democracy, Christianity, European culture and Europeans are to be driven out of Europe. 50 million North Africans from Muslim countries are to be imported into the EU.”

"FP: Who exactly is behind this agenda? Why is it being done so secretly and how come it is allowed to happen this way?

"Geller: Jamie, this agenda is being pushed at the highest levels of the European Union. The official EuroMed Partnership website says it’s an initiative of “the EU and its southern neighbors.” And it’s huge in scope. Recently in Brussels there was a summit meeting of trade ministers from 43 countries in Europe and the Mediterranean. And it’s being done secretly because the European governing elites know the people of Europe wouldn’t go along if they knew what was happening...."

Thank you for the kind words of support. I spent the early part of yesterday at the courthouse dealing with a custody issue surrounding my niece and nephew. This caused extra conflict within my family which spilled over to my house. I spent most of the day attempting to be the peace keeper, to no avail. Thankfully the reset button has seemed to work for everyone, as today is as if yesterday never happened. I nodded off last night deep in prayer, which I will attribute to the major difference today. It still never ceases to amaze me what deep emotional wounds can be healed by a little time spent focused on the Lord.

The almost ironic thing I am noticing is, of the few reports I have seen regarding this executive order, almost all of them are touting it as a strengthening of states rights. This is laughable at best. If the pieces Susanna and I have been working on are any indication, this may just be a scratch in the surface of everything he and Biden have planned. We are in serious trouble as a nation with these two at the helm.

As a small family farmer, I am well aware of the threat from GMO's and corporate control of the food supply. I am pleased with the rising public support for buying local and protecting the small organic farmer. That said, Susanna's emphatic support of the Pope's ridiculous, and highly NEW AGE contention that "food is a right" is alarming.

Food is a result of work. Those who do not work, should not eat. What my small farm produces is the result of my own sweat and back breaking labor. The fruit of which is primarily enjoyed by myself and family, as well as all those whom I choose to sell, donate, or share with.

You, Susanna, nor anyone else, has the "right" to take from me what you have not earned. You do not have a "right" to take what I produce.

It seems to me that not just food and housing, but "water" is also being declared a "right" - (see: World Political Forum).

We are talking about natural resource management on a global scale, and that requires global governance. After all, someone is going to have to guarantee equitable distribution of all these "rights" and enforce negative consequences for transgressors (those who take/use more than their "fair" share).

Fights over food, water, land....the unequal distribution of "resources", have always provided seeds for conflict. Put resources under one controlling authority, and voila, no conflict.

Anonymous 3:17The bible provides for food for the poor, allowing them to glean.http://bible.cc/leviticus/23-22.htm

Maybe we need to do something like making people work hours in the food banks for the food they get as in done in food coops and do other work for food stamps. The problem is that unions complain that they take away jobs from them. It also means more government. I don't know how we solve the problems of urbanization when there are no jobs around.

The true problem lies with corporations. Once everything became massed produced, instead of being produced locally, it successfully disconnected the people from what it was they used and consumed. As employee's of the corporations people only ever really saw what it was they produced.

Slowly things like gardens disappeared, why? Because people as a whole now saw food as a product and were a little further disconnected from what they were consuming. Now most people can't fend for themselves and survive without the corporations providing it to them. They may be able to kill an animal, but don't know how to properly gut it. Which in all likelyhood lead to them ruining the meat or possibly giving themselves food poisoning.

People have become disconnected and depent on other entities for their survival. In my mind teaching self sufficiency is the only logical start. Genesis 3:17-19 come to mind, but this point is useless unless people know how to do these things.

The United Nations and Secretary of State Hillary Clinton are moving forward with their plan to confiscate your guns.

The United States joined 152 other countries in support of the Arms Trade Treaty Resolution, which establishes the dates for the 2012 UN conference intended to attack American sovereignty by stripping Americans of the right to keep and bear arms.

Working groups of anti-gun countries will begin scripting language for the conference this year, creating a blueprint for other countries when they meet at the full conference.

The stakes couldn't be higher.

Former United Nation's ambassador John Bolton has cautioned gun owners about the Arms Trade Treaty and says the UN “is trying to act as though this is really just a treaty about international arms trade between nation states, but there’s no doubt that the real agenda here is domestic firearms control.”

Establishing the dates for the Arms Trade Treaty Conference is just the first step toward their plans for total gun confiscation.

The worldwide gun control mob will ensure the passage of an egregious, anti-gun treaty...

. . .and that's where Secretary of State Hillary Clinton steps in.

Once the UN Gun Ban is passed by the General Assembly of the United Nations it must be ratified by each nation, including the United States.

As an arch enemy of gun owners, Clinton has pledged to push the U.S. Senate to ratify the treaty.

U.S. reverses stance on treaty to regulate arms tradeArshad MohammedWASHINGTONWed Oct 14, 2009 11:56pm EDTRelated NewsArmed violence kills 2,000 a day worldwide: groupsTue, Oct 6 2009WASHINGTON (Reuters) - The United States reversed policy on Wednesday and said it would back launching talks on a treaty to regulate arms sales as long as the talks operated by consensus, a stance critics said gave every nation a veto.

The decision, announced in a statement released by the U.S. State Department, overturns the position of former President George W. Bush's administration, which had opposed such a treaty on the grounds that national controls were better.

U.S. Secretary of State Hillary Clinton said the United States would support the talks as long as the negotiating forum, the so-called Conference on the Arms Trade Treaty, "operates under the rules of consensus decision-making."

"Consensus is needed to ensure the widest possible support for the Treaty and to avoid loopholes in the Treaty that can be exploited by those wishing to export arms irresponsibly," Clinton said in a written statement.

While praising the Obama administration's decision to overturn the Bush-era policy and to proceed with negotiations to regulate conventional arms sales, some groups criticized the U.S. insistence that decisions on the treaty be unanimous.

"The shift in position by the world's biggest arms exporter is a major breakthrough in launching formal negotiations at the United Nations in order to prevent irresponsible arms transfers," Amnesty International and Oxfam International said in a joint statement.

However, they said insisting that decisions on the treaty be made by consensus "could fatally weaken a final deal."

"Governments must resist US demands to give any single state the power to veto the treaty as this could hold the process hostage during the course of negotiations. We call on all governments to reject such a veto clause," said Oxfam International's policy adviser Debbie Hillier.

The proposed legally binding treaty would tighten regulation of, and set international standards for, the import, export and transfer of conventional weapons.

Supporters say it would give worldwide coverage to close gaps in existing regional and national arms export control systems that allow weapons to pass onto the illicit market.

Nations would remain in charge of their arms export control arrangements but would be legally obliged to assess each export against criteria agreed under the treaty. Governments would have to authorize transfers in writing and in advance.

The main opponent of the treaty in the past was the U.S. Bush administration, which said national controls were better. Last year, the United States accounted for more than two-thirds of some $55.2 billion in global arms transfer deals.

Arms exporters China, Russia and Israel abstained last year in a U.N. vote on the issue.

The proposed treaty is opposed by conservative U.S. think tanks like the Heritage Foundation, which said last month that it would not restrict the access of "dictators and terrorists" to arms but would be used to reduce the ability of democracies such as Israel to defend their people.

The U.S. lobbying group the National Rifle Association has also opposed the treaty.

A resolution before the U.N. General Assembly is sponsored by seven nations including major arms exporter Britain. It calls for preparatory meetings in 2010 and 2011 for a conference to negotiate a treaty in 2012.

Conventional arms transfers are a crucial national security concern for the United States, and we have always supported effective action to control the international transfer of arms.

The United States is prepared to work hard for a strong international standard in this area by seizing the opportunity presented by the Conference on the Arms Trade Treaty at the United Nations. As long as that Conference operates under the rule of consensus decision-making needed to ensure that all countries can be held to standards that will actually improve the global situation by denying arms to those who would abuse them, the United States will actively support the negotiations. Consensus is needed to ensure the widest possible support for the Treaty and to avoid loopholes in the Treaty that can be exploited by those wishing to export arms irresponsibly.

On a national basis, the United States has in place an extensive and rigorous system of controls that most agree is the “gold standard” of export controls for arms transfers. On a bilateral basis, the United States regularly engages other states to raise their standards and to prohibit the transfer or transshipment of capabilities to rogue states, terrorist groups, and groups seeking to unsettle regions. Multilaterally, we have consistently supported high international standards, and the Arms Trade Treaty initiative presents us with the opportunity to promote the same high standards for the entire international community that the United States and other responsible arms exporters already have in place to ensure that weaponry is transferred for legitimate purposes.

The United States is committed to actively pursuing a strong and robust treaty that contains the highest possible, legally binding standards for the international transfer of conventional weapons. We look forward to this negotiation as the continuation of the process that began in the UN with the 2008 UN Group of Governmental Experts on the ATT and continued with the 2009 UN Open-Ended Working Group on ATT.

Isn't it just like Pat Robertson to make a fool of himself when there is an International tragedy?!

PAT ROBERTSON: And, you know, Kristi, something happened a long time ago in Haiti, and people might not want to talk about it. They were under the heel of the French. You know, Napoleon III and whatever. And they got together and swore a pact to the devil. They said, "We will serve you if you will get us free from the French." True story. And so, the devil said, "OK, it's a deal."

And they kicked the French out. You know, the Haitians revolted and got themselves free. But ever since, they have been cursed by one thing after the other. Desperately poor. That island of Hispaniola is one island. It's cut down the middle. On the one side is Haiti; on the other side is the Dominican Republic. Dominican Republic is prosperous, healthy, full of resorts, et cetera. Haiti is in desperate poverty. Same island. They need to have and we need to pray for them a great turning to God. And out of this tragedy, I'm optimistic something good may come. But right now, we're helping the suffering people, and the suffering is unimaginable.

Chlorine changed to 'protect' the water supply to 1 million residents in D.C. & Northern Virginia???

The main disinfectant in the drinking water of nearly 1 million D.C. and Northern Virginia residents is being switched by the Army Corps of Engineers to thwart the threat of terrorists releasing deadly chlorine gas.

The switch will be from chlorine gas to a liquid form of chlorine called sodium hypochlorite. Both are equally effective, according to the Washington Aqueduct, an arm of the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers. But the liquid, "is considered much safer to transport, store and use than gaseous chlorine," said an official.

"As hard as it is to believe, some farmers have actually been discouraged from growing crops by way of agricultural subsidies in order to keep food prices up for the benefit of futures market speculators.

PAYING FARMERS NOT TO GROW FOOD WHILE OTHERS STARVE FOR THE SAKE OF FINANCIAL GAIN IS IMMORAL!!!!"

"You, Susanna, nor anyone else, has the "right" to take from me what you have not earned. You do not have a "right" to take what I produce."

You are confusing American Capitalistic ethics with Christianity. You do not produce food. God created the earth and everything in it for human beings. He never told Adam and Eve "You have no right to take what I produce, if you're poor and hungry." "Only the rich who earn money can eat."

"Anonymous said...The Pope IS speaking as a politician. His goals are clearly earth centered. Thanks, Susanna, for posting what he said. In case you missed it, here's the translation:"

I find it intriguing how you have managed to squeeze a little pope and catholic bashing by twisting the staight forward statements of an honorable man into your satanic view of the world - but how DO you see stewardship of earths God given resources? Or is it simply something you choose not to engage since it doesn't fit with your hate program? Apologies to the rest of you good people here but I am sick of these internet speech pograms and abuses by folk who call themselves Christians and act like Beelzebubs little helpers and do not have the courage to identify themselves....that is all..God Bless,Melinda

Thank you Susanna once again for your impeccable research and clarification - and for your seemingly endless supply of patience - I have much to learn from you folk here - again I apoligize or my outburst - Melinda

I wouldn't be so quick to call Pat Robertson a fool regarding his Haiti/devil deal comments.

Even a cursory review of Haitian history reveals the critical role played by Voodoo in the revolution against the French.

Not that Wikipedia is the best source, but this quote on Haitian history does seem to support Robertson's contention:

"On August 22, 1791, slaves in the northern region of the colony staged a revolt that began the Haitian Revolution. Tradition marks the beginning of the revolution at a vodou ceremony at Bois Caïman (Alligator Woods) near Cap-Français. The call to arms was issued by a Houngan (Vodou priest) named Dutty Boukman. Within hours, the northern plantations were in flames. The rebellion spread through the entire colony. Boukman was captured and executed, but the rebellion continued to spread rapidly...."

Now, I'm no expert on voodoo, but it does sound an awful lot like dark dealings with the devil with a bit of Catholic ritual thrown in. (Perhaps Susanna would care to offer us a better definition of "voodoo"?)

As a side note, I'm sure the UN will make some sort of showy effort, and Obama may even invoke FEMA's help, but it will be left to the same groups who are always at the forefront of responding to such natural disasters to do most of the heavy lifting, all those predominantly Christian relief agencies and missions networks.

Stewardship of God's resources starts, Melinda, with the individual. It then extends outward to the family, the local village or community, then to the state, or country, and then to the rest of the world. Under the NEW AGE plan, control of resources begins at the TOP with a group of elitists making all the decisions. Resources are allocated downwards, leaving the individual with whatever the elite determines to be fair.

My comment regarding Robertson had little to do with the content of what he was saying, more so with the timing of saying it. It is one thing to run down a list of reasons why something may have happened once the event has come to a close, but to start laying blame now conveys a callousness to people who as a "Christian" he should now be reaching out to. Or is this comment less of a social gaffe, and more of portraying christians in a negative light intentionally? With Robertson, I am unsure.

Maybe you ought to read this non-Catholic Christian article entitled WHAT DOES THE BIBLE SAY ABOUT HUMAN RIGHTS?

http://www.gotquestions.org/human-rights.html

Then, perhaps you will understand that if "food is a human right", it is not because the Pope says so or because I say so. It is because God says so.

Moreover, when I said "food is a right," I wasn't talking about taking anything away from you that you honestly produce on your farm by the sweat of your brow.

That would be unjust. And contrary to what you apparently believe, the Catholic Church would agree. In fact, to deprive a worker of his wages is one of the sins that "cries to heaven for justice."

I will concede that there are some apostate Catholics who advocate collectivism in their so-called Liberation Theology (Marxism tricked out as Catholicism), which has as little to do with "liberation as it has to do with "theology," but this has been condemned by the Catholic Church.

In terms of human rights, what you nor I nor anyone else doesn't have the right to do - whether as capitalists or communists - is to monopolize the means of production so that no one else can honestly produce their own food by the sweat of their brow.

And one more thing...

If you think that all you have to do is to arbitrarily slap a "New Age" label on whatever idea you don't happen to like or agree with in order to cause us all to quake in our boots, you are very much mistaken.

It is not "New Age" for the Pope to condemn the kind of infernal avarice that would go so far as to pay farmers NOT to grow food while others starve for the sake of financial gain. It is not "New Age" for anyone else to condemn it either!

As for "cleaning your barn," from what I have learned about this Pope, he would probably be glad to help......with no strings attached!

Also when Jesus fed the five thousand, do you think he said first, 'if you ain't workin' mate, you ain't gettin' one scale o' this fish, nor one crumb of this bread'?

So, if the pope, flesh and blood person (regardless of his beliefs etc), asked you for something to eat, you'd have the frail old man clean your barn first would you?

Do you not know that if you did not feed the least of your brethren, you have not done it unto Jesus Christ our Lord and Saviour?

Did the good Samaritan demand Jesus work and sweat before she gave Him water?

Do you not know that God is Love? Are you abiding in Him? Is He, and His Love, shown by our FRUITS abiding in you? This is not an accusation, it is a prompt for you to ponder on.

If a man asks you for your coat, give him your shirt also. Do not store up treasures on Earth, where thieves break in, and moth and rust destroy, but store up your riches in Heaven. Where your treasures are, there will your heart be also.

It is harder for a rich man to enter heaven than it is for a Camel to get through the Eye of a Needle.

But when you give to the needy, do not let your left hand know what your right hand is doing.

God bless you, and fill you with His unselfish Love.

For God so loved the World he gave His only Son that whosoever should believe on him should not perish but have everlasting life. Of course, the condition is that we abide in Him and He in us, for faith without works is dead! We are saved by grace, not works, but to abide in Jesus Christ we must obey His commandments, the works are no longer works in that such are done out of a love of the faith in Jesus Christ, and loving our neighbours as ourselves, you show me your faith without works, and I'll show you my faith by my works, and here is the EVIDENCE that Jesus Chist dwells in you.

God bless you and may He bless you with His love. For no greater love has a man than to lay down his life for his friends.

Regarding Haiti . . . While Catholicism is supposed to be the national religion, the official religion -- as even sanctioned by then president Jean-Bertrand Aristide in 2003 -- is voodoo, which means spirits. While seventy percent of Haitians are Catholic, and thirty percent are Protestant, goes the saying, a hundred percent are voodooists, whereby spirits of deceased family members are contacted and revered and even allowed to enter the body during dancing trances.

The Catholic Church CONDEMNS necromancy (initiating contact with the dead through mediumship, fortunetelling, or sorcery, the essence of voodoo).

I meant to write, '...., and here is the EVIDENCE that Jesus Christ dwells in you.'

Obey Him and His commandments, let Him guide you in His love, do not hide your lamp under a bushel, let all see Jesus Christ's power working through your life. Abide in Him and He will abide in you, for a man cannot serve two masters, for he will love one and despise the other. You cannot serve mammon and God. The love of money is the root of all evil.

Voudoo people will always say the same thing:"..You don't understand voudoo, it's almost always used for GOOD,not to hurt anyone",.. which is exactlywhat all these Wicca people here in the States will come back with."There's black magic and there's white magic..."etc._But Haitii is known worldwide for it's Voudou, and that's a fact.

But also, Haiti, which was thefirst slave colony to declare independance and get it,refuses to play ball with the World Bank and is one of only a handful of countriesin the world who don't pay "tithes"to the Rothschilds.It's the central banks that have impoverished Haiti. It's a double whammy. I think they've ticked-off both God AND the devil.

Christians are to voluntarily share their resources out of love and obedience.

However, government agencies and leaders are NEVER TO DEMAND IT. This leads to socialism and communism, and can also lead to laziness. There is a principle in Scripture, if a man does not work neither should he eat.

Concerning World Sabbath of Religous Reconciliation, I have found several links for different years and events.The World Sabbath site posted previously is from a episcopal church in Illinois who are promoting an event in Novi, Mi.

Some of the other info I have found include,

A event from 2004 held in Bloomfield Hills. The contact is a Edward L. Mullins. Any relation to Eustice?

http://tinyurl.com/y9s8d5m

A article about the first touts endorsee's as:The World Sabbath project has been endorsed by the Episcopal Diocese of Michigan, a synagogue (Temple Israel of Ann Arbor), the Detroit Muslim Center, by the United Religions Initiative, the Parliament of the World's Religions and the National Council for Community and Justice (formerly known as the National Conference of Christians and Jews). Reinhart hopes other religious groups and congregations will take up his idea and hold services or events on 22 January. He has received phone calls from Africa, Australia and Israel about the event, and pastors from four churches - in New York, Texas and California - are planning their own events for the first World Sabbath.

The artcle goes on to state:The Christ Church Cranbrook in affluent Bloomfield Hills, Michigan, where the first World Sabbath will be celebrated, has a long history of connections in high places. Edward Scripps of the Scripps-Howard publishing syndicate was the father-in-law of George Booth who, in 1906, replaced James D. Scripps as president of the Detroit News. In 1928, George G. Booth also built the Christ Church Cranbrook on his expansive and very expensive Cranbrook Estate. The architect of the Booth mansion also designed the Masonic Temple of Detroit and the Trinity Church where Rev. Rodney Reinhart, initiator of the World Sabbath, serves as interim pastor:

http://tinyurl.com/yksohl7

From interfaith education initiative:Interfaith Holy Day of Peace: World Sabbath of Religious Reconciliation January 29, 2005 - Christ Church Cranbrook, IL

1/13/2005 [www.worldsabbath.com] The sixth annual Interfaith Holy Day of Peace among the Religions of the World will be celebrated at a World Sabbath service at Christ Church Cranbrook in Bloomfield Hills on January 29, 2005 at 7:00 p.m., with pre-service music beginning at 6:30 p.m. This interfaith service will feature speakers, leaders, and musicians from Muslim, Hindu, Christian, Jewish, Bahaï¿½i, Sikh, Native American, and Hispanic cultures and traditions. Members of all faith communities are invited to participate in this service to pray for social justice and peace throughout the world.

The Interfaith Holy Day of Peace was an initiative begun by Episcopal priests Reverend Rodney Reinhart and Reverend Edward L. Mullins in 2000. ï¿½When we established the World Sabbath, I wanted it to become a focal point for the world's religions to think of nonviolent ways to share their faith,ï¿½ said Mullins, Christ Church Cranbrook Rector. ï¿½We hoped that the World Sabbath would become a tool in which representatives from the worldï¿½s religions could speak of ï¿½theirï¿½ God in words familiar to them and could do so without censorship. Guess what: it worked.ï¿½

Re:Voudoo people will always say the same thing:"..You don't understand voudoo, it's almost always used for GOOD,not to hurt anyone",.. which is exactlywhat all these Wicca people here in the States will come back with."There's black magic and there's white magic..."etc._But Haitii is known worldwide for it's Voudou, and that's a fact.

You are absolutely correct, Paul. There is no substantial difference between black magic and white magic. Whatever might appear to be a "difference" is one of degree not of kind.

In either case, spiritual entities are invoked to produce RESULTS.

Since angelic spirits who are friendly to God would never go against God's will by allowing themselves to be "magically" controlled by man, we may conclude with certainty that where fraud has been discounted, any spiritual manifestations that may occur in Voodoo rituals are manifestations of infernal spirits......a.k.a. demons.

Port-au-Prince, Haiti (CNN) Countries and aid groups large and small worked Thursday to help survivors in quake-ravaged Haiti in an international effort rivaling the response to the 2004 Asian tsunami.

Obama said the U.S. military has secured Haiti's main airport, which can now receive relief workers.

Haitian airspace was opened Thursday to charitable organizations, enabling humanitarian aid to be flown in, a Red Cross official said. But the limited infrastructure in Haiti doesn't appear to be able to accommodate the flood of aircraft headed there.

One humanitarian flight from the University of Miami couldn't take off because it couldn't land in Haiti and another was hovering in the air above the country, CNN's Elizabeth Cohen reported in Fort Lauderdale, Florida.

. . . . the United States is providing a communications network to shore up the battered Haitian government infrastructure. People around the world have tapped into social media Web sites, such as Facebook and Twitter, to find out about survivors and keep up with the crisis.

The quake affected roughly one in three Haitians -- about 3 million people, the Red Cross estimated. It was so strong that it was felt in Cuba, more than 200 miles away.

At least 16 U.N. peacekeepers were killed in the quake, as well as Joseph Serge Miot, the Roman Catholic archbishop of Port-au-Prince.

The calamity has overwhelmed doctors . . . Port-au-Prince hospitals have collapsed and the few facilities still open can't handle the needs of the injured. The United States and other countries were dispatching medical supplies, facilities and personnel . . .

. . . rescue teams have begun their work in Port-au-Prince to search for the missing, from residents sandwiched in their homes and to others who are unaccounted for, including some members of the Haitian parliament, the U.N. peacekeeping force and Doctors Without Borders.

The overcrowded national penitentiary in the capital collapsed, and inmates escaped, prompting worries about looting, said Edmond Mulet, the U.N. assistant secretary-general for peacekeeping operations. But Haitian Prime Minister Jean-Max Bellerive said the population has remained relatively calm in the face of the disaster.

. . . a contingent of 2,000 U.S. Marines will help the international peacekeepers who have served as police in Haiti, which doesn't have an army.

We've got the 82nd Airborne and other military assets coming in . . ..

The bodies and the bleeding covered every inch of a small clinic in Port-au-Prince, the doctors inside overwhelmed with the wounded as they limply lay on floors or leaned on walls in despair.

"We need medicine. We need medical help in general . . . Some of the hospitals, they collapsed. The hospitals, they are full and they put people in the outside. ... so we need some hospitals, some medicine and some doctors."

Outside the clinic -- and on city sidewalks -- people piled up bodies because there was nowhere to take or bury them.

On one street lay the body of a girl, maybe 5 or 6, covered by part of a cardboard box. On another, a man carted an elderly lady in a wheelbarrow toward a hospital.

In the absence of heavy machinery to clear the debris, residents used their hands and brawn to lift large slabs of concrete. Some trapped victims punched out bricks themselves and tried to squeeze through cracks in the fallen structures.

Rescuers followed the flies. Wherever the insects buzzed meant a survivor or body lay buried underneath.

Near the presidential palace, residents dug for hours to rescue a 13-year-old girl named Bea, who had been trapped in the rubble since Tuesday. A wild cheer went up as she was pulled out alive. But nearby lay the bodies of four of her family members.

With phone service spotty, residents ran up to reporters and shoved pieces of paper in their hands. They asked reporters to read the notes on air so family members in the United States would know they were alive.

It is a necessity of life. Like air, and water, and living space. The NA is about controlling resources, telling you and me where to live, what to eat, as well as what to think.

You are buying into the New Age lie if you believe food is a "right".

The New Agers can only be successful by proclaiming they are protecting our "human rights" and have a method of making all things equal, or fair.

You need to reread the Bible my friend. Everything you quoted supports the view that compassion for the poor and the sharing of one's resources is based on a Godly nature, a voluntary demonstration of compassion and mercy. That is the opposite of forced sharing, of taking what belongs to another individual without their consent.

When food, or any other resource, becomes a "right", it's perfectly okay to take it from someone else.

“You are absolutely correct, Paul. There is no substantial difference between black magic and white magic. Whatever might appear to be a "difference" is one of degree not of kind.”

and

”In either case, spiritual entities are invoked to produce RESULTS.”

Isn’t it true that Catholics ask the saints for intercession? Is this not the same as invoking spiritual entities to “produce results”? Is this not “white magic”? Pretty confusing to me, let alone all those superstitious peoples who see no problem in being both Catholic, and Voudun.

Susanna/Dorothy wrote: "The Vatican newspaper and radio station are criticizing James Cameron's 3-D blockbuster for flirting with the idea that worship of nature can replace religion — a notion the pope has warned against."

Amen to that! Worship of nature is called Pantheism. The view of Judaism and Roman Catholicism is that God created nature. When an Orthodox Jew sees a beautiful natural scene we recite the following blessing (in Hebrew):

"Blessed are You, Lord our God and King of the universe, Who made the creations of the Beginning (as in Gen. 1:1)."

To Anonymous @ 12:10 PMRe: "Pretty confusing to me, let alone all those superstitious peoples who see no problem in being both Catholic, and Voudun."

___________________________________

While there certainly exist some obviously MISGUIDED people who choose to believe (IN ERROR) that there is 'no problem in being Catholic and Voudun' . . .

The Catholic Church absolutely CONDEMNS necromancy: initiating contact with the dead through mediumship, fortunetelling, or sorcery - in other words, the very essence of VOODOO!!!

It has also been said that in some counntries, like Haiti, there were people who tried to cover up their Paganism with the missionaries who were trying to convert them to Christianity - by mixing the two together.

Re:Isn’t it true that Catholics ask the saints for intercession? Is this not the same as invoking spiritual entities to “produce results”? Is this not “white magic”? Pretty confusing to me, let alone all those superstitious peoples who see no problem in being both Catholic, and Voudun.

Exactly right. Catholics don't pray to Saints. Catholics humbly ask the Saints to pray to God for them for certain favors - AND ONLY IF THEY BE IN ACCORDANCE WITH GOD'S HOLY WILL. (Very important point)

In other words, Catholics are humbly willing to accept the fact that sometimes God says "No."

Occultists are not willing to take "no" for an answer. This is why they invoke spirits in the first place.

Where these spirits produce "results," the results are preternatural, not supernatural.

Due to the fact that the angelic nature is higher than that of man, it is easy to confuse a preternatural phenomenon with one that is supernatural. Only God can act supernaturally.

But in the last analysis, don't you ever ask your fellow Christians to pray for you?

For us Catholics, asking for the intercession not only of our fellow Christians here on earth, but also of formally canonized Saints who have "fallen asleep in Christ" and are in Heaven, is an implicit sign of our faith in the Resurrection of Our Lord Jesus Christ and in the life of the world to come. Moreover, if the prayers are answered, we believe it is God who answers.

Demons would NEVER intercede to God on anyone's behalf. This is because demons think they ARE god!

Seems to me King Saul asked for help from Samuel, after the latter had fallen asleep. Poor Saul was just asking for some help, but was condemned to death for this particular act. Maybe Len could explain this one.

As a fallen man, I'll take whatever support and protection I can get in the way of prayer. If the angels are watching, I hope they're praying for me. If the saints are watching, I hope they are praying for me too.

The scriptures are full of advice to pray for one another, and not only that, but to pray without ceasing. I think the key thing to keep in mind is what is in a person's heart as he/she prays.

The methodology (form) of the prayer, even if it includes a few unnecessary crutches, is of little consequence. It's sincerity that counts. I used to think the proper way to pray was to sit cross-legged up on a mountaintop, blowing smoke to the four directions. Then I came to realize I could pray just as effectively while driving my car on a busy freeway. It wasn't the form or place that was important, but the sincerity of the request in relation to God's will.

To Susanna 10:42, I know this comment is late but, I wanted to let you know that not all prtestants believe in total depravity. I ama protestant, specifically a pentacostal, and I do not agree with that doctorine. like you I blieve man retained his free will after the fall. When the Scripture mentions predestination I see it as God knowing the end result and we don't, so He knows who will be saved and who will not. How else could He say that He is not willing that any should perish. God bless you,

Jesus Christ did feed people spiritually, and still does, he also fed them PHYSICALLY.

It is surely the duty of man to work when he is able-bodied and able-minded to do so.

However, this is not to be used as an excuse not to feed and clothe those far more in need than we are.

I am sorry that it was not obvious from the context of my post that I meant right as a moral right as opposed to a socio-political one.

I do not think when Jesus Christ asks you rhetorically whether or not you fed and clothed your brother, visited him in hospital, in prison, or comforted him, that our Jesus will be interested in playing semantics and politics. It will be did you do it? If you did it even unto the least of your brethren you did it unto me, come in and receive your eternal rest. If you didn't, it will be 'depart from Me you worker of iniquity, I never knew you'.

When I say 'right', which I qualify as being a moral right as opposed to socio-political in nature, this does not mean that it is not on the condition of whether or not one is able-bodied/minded and whether one can get work or not.

Our position as Christians, is to feed those who ask of us, and to water and clothe and comfort them.

Perhaps people should try going without food for a week or two, and then think about doing unto others as we'd have done unto ourselves, and feed those who ask of us.

Christians are to voluntarily share their resources out of love and obedience.

However, government agencies and leaders are NEVER TO DEMAND IT. This leads to socialism and communism, and can also lead to laziness. There is a principle in Scripture, if a man does not work neither should he eat.

It is important to know the difference between the two!!"

With the greatest of respect, where have I written Governments should demand it? It is clear that my statement is about individual Christians and our non-negotiable responsibilities as such individual Christians towards our fellow human beings.

It seems that socialist/occultist Eleanor Roosevelt was right when she said, "The destiny of human rights is in the hands of all our citizens in all our communities."

The UN has declared that “food is a human right”. And they, of course, are making a claim to be the sole purveyors of that right.

http://www.fao.org/righttofood/

The humanistic legal framework concept that food is a “right” stems from:

"The International Covenant on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights (ICESCR) which is a multilateral treaty adopted by the United Nations General Assembly on December 16, 1966, and in force from January 3, 1976. It commits its parties to work toward the granting of economic, social, and cultural rights (ESCR) to individuals, including labour rights and rights to health, education, and an adequate standard of living. As of December, 2008, the Covenant had 160 parties.[1] A further six countries had signed, but not yet ratified the Covenant."

"The ICESCR is part of the International Bill of Human Rights, along with the Universal Declaration of Human Rights (UDHR) and the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights (ICCPR), including the latter's first and second Optional Protocols.[2]"

"The Covenant is monitored by the UN Committee on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights."

We are living in the days when man can declare what are rights, define them, limit them, and change them, at whim. This my friends, IS THE NEW AGE!

On another note, seeing as the inference of supporting taxation to support others in greater need than ourselves, which was not what I was then writing about, was imputed, I would like to point out that there is a vast difference between a capitalist society with a reasoned and reasonable social welfare infrastructure and a Communist society.

I personally support such a capitalist society having a reasonable social welfare infrastructure with strict checks and balances and conditions to be met, and see it as a mark of civilisation. Firstly, for those who through ill-health, old age, injury or severe disability, provable through medical assessments and history, and secondly on a limited basis with strict conditions to be met by the recipient of any such benefits, for those through no fault of their own have lost their jobs and have little family support, and negligable savings.

One may wonder otherwise, why the poorest should pay taxes for roads and lighting, when if such are able to afford a car, they are often unlikely to afford petrol to keep the thing going regularly.

Should any of you pay government for maintaining the infrastructure of bridges, roads, lighting, garbage disposal, clean water supplies etc, otherwise? Could this be contrued as communism? What then? Should such be managed entirely by private companies, without government intervention, which can then charge (tax) you extortionately? Please see second half before responding, otherwise you are responding to half a message. Thank you. Rob in London, CONTINUED....

What about private armies and private police forces? Why should the poor pay taxes to keep the police running, when generally speaking, if you live in a poor and run-down area, you are far less likely to get a quick or adequate response from the police and justice system than someone living in a richer area and with more money to secure 'justice'.

I don't think, after their horrific experiences with Blackwater, the Iraqi people would be too keen on private armies, do you? Even so, it seems like our Armies are being used as mercenaries for the private interests of oil barons and NWO business men. Haliburtons ring any bells? Why are you not up in arms (no pun intended) over our taxes and our boys' lives being spent for such purposes? Or is it Commie to think they should be serving and protecting the public?

We should be outraged that our respective monies are spent on either the NASA space program, or the European space program. We'd have no more taxes, in terms of bleeding money from our pockets if our money was not spent on such, but rather on helping the most needy in society.

Jesus was not necessarily against taxation when he said give unto Ceasar what is Ceasar's, the outrage of Matthew having been a tax collector was much more likely so because the POOR were being unjustly taxed.

We would have even fewer taxes to pay if we all started behaving as Christians should and fed and clothed and comforted those more in need than ourselves.

I do not think Jesus Christ would be interested in any excuses of not having done so because we thought it was New Age to do so, and if we oppose such measures as to stop government from helping the very needy, where we as individuals are miserably and rebelliously failing, so that even one preventable injury or death is not prevented because of our actions and inactions, what then?

If we don't want to be carted off into Socialist Babylon, then we should certainly be doing our Christian duties as individuals, and preaching and obeying Matthew 25, and the Epistle of James much more vigorously than we are doing.

God bless and keep you, and may you never be without food, water, shelter and comfort as a disabled or elderly person, or single father or mother with children, nor lose the job you worked so hard in through no fault of your own(which did not pay enough to start with, for you to have otherwise saved something for a rainy day).

Just because the New Age Movement is Communitarian, does not mean we should sit back and watch, abandoning Christian territory to them to distort and claim as their own, and no, I have not done this here.

Please do not pick and choose from what I have written here, but take it in its entirety.

Thank you anons, and Rob in London. So no, the people of Haiti don't have a "right" to the food I grow. But that said, I will send them some of my produce or the equivalent in canned goods.

4:20 PM

Well done Anon, I don't care about the semantics mine or yours or anyone's here regards this, but I do care about inaction and action, that helps others in need, or opposes such, and I care about the fact as to whether we choose to be blind hypocrites as Christians or no.

Appendage to last thread; there would be far less money wasted by government in fighting crime, often although not always a result of poverty, if some of that money was spent in helping the most needy in society.

Severe poverty breeds crime which then becomes habitual and endemic, growing more and more difficult to remedy as time goes by.

A = create genetically modified foods that ruin non-genetically modified crops through cross pollination. These non-genetically modified crops do not then, in many cases, seed properly. The seeds of genetically modified crops are patented, and so it is up to the whim of the supplier as to whether or not you get seeds for plants (now your non-genetically modified seeds are fewer in supply), the quality of such, and whether or not you can afford them.

B. To demand the uprooting of indigenous crops in favour of supplanting them with crops brought in by the UN subsidiser 'helper'. If such countries do not do so, they are generally embargoed with strict tarriffs placed on their goods and debts IMMEDIATELY increased with high interest rates added. Once the indigenous crop is uprooted and replaced by the UN backed import (E.G., basmalti rice etc uprooted in India & Bangladesh, and replaced with American long-grain rice), the crop is controlled as to who can produce it and how. This leads to greater poverty and malnutrition among the poorest of such countries.

The UN is not really interested in feeding anyone, neither are those behind the New Age/ NWO movement in general. They are interested in subversion and illusion. I do not see the Rothschilds, Rockefellers, and Bill Gates of this World supporting any project with their own very large stash of money, unless it is to reduce the World's population of its 'useless eaters' through financing enforced sterilisation programmes and perilous experimentation through inordinate vaccines on the World's poorest.

C. The control of cash crops through, for example, forbidding through patent etc, the production of cocoa into the finished product. Such impoverished countries are often forced to sell ony raw materials (i.e., the intact cocoa beans, here), at a pittance. This also does not do anything for the employ of labour in such countries and so they are once again kept in poverty by the UN, which is little more than a front for the Rockefeller Foundation et Al.

Vast amounts of land have been stolen from small village farmers by their unscrupulous governments, and sold off to their Freemasonic Luciferian brothers in arms in Russia, China, S. Arabia, and the West, with the full backing of the UN through the World Bank, IMF, WHO, ect, with their laws and regulations to make things 'fairer' (NOT!. Such countries had better behhave if they do not want to suddenly find themselves portrayed as terrorist-harbourers or failed states in need of remedy, via arms supplying by the West, China and Russia, to guerrilla groups and psychopathic revolutionaries, then needing invasion and a new and obedient puppet dictator installed, bowing to every whim and command of the men behind the UN.

What the UN means by food being a right for all, is to A:

Try to subvert and undermine Christianity (They've done a 'great' job of infiltrating the churches with the likes of such as Hinn, Dollar, and Copeland and their so-called 'prosperity' teachings.), through making it SEEM as though the New Age UN is the best thing in fairness since sliced bread, with their gimmicks such as, 'UN declares food is a human right', maybe, but they don't really think so...

What the UN, in my humble opinion wants, is to impoverish the middle classes and working classes even more through subversion and media & political subterfuge, impoverish the poorest countries even more so, whilst being very 'creative' and 'selective' with their film footage that they show us in the West. They don't give a hoot about helping the poor, they want to murder most of the World's population to bring it to be 'maintained' at under 500, 000, 000.

Sure, they may for an intermittent period seem to help others in poorer countries, whist they tie up loose ends in building their New Age One World Govt., in preparation for the Anti-Christ, or even use it as an excuse to start a 3rd World War, and then usher in false peace and false prosperity. Once everything's in place, it will cost a fortune to by bread, oil, etc, for everyone, except the very rich behind the UN, and subsidies for the most compliant and useful of the 'useless' eaters.

On a quick note, another example of the multi-national companies is to use the WHO etc, as a front for testing food and medical products, which are quickly removed from the people who have come to rely on them.

One such example is the supply of dried baby milk to often illiterate and vulnerable mothers in parts of Africa. The milk is mixed with contaminated water, leading to high infant mortality, and if the baby survives till the end of the several weeks or so of company trials, he or she finds that the mother's breast milk has dried up and she can no longer feed her baby. She does not have the finances to buy milk, nor anywhere to procure it, and the company responsible has fled, having dealt another fatal blow to another regions set of villages and their 'useless' eaters (though they were not eating much before, that's for sure), often sitting unbeknown to village inhabitants upon a wealth of minerals just waiting to be stolen by some rich multi-nationalist freemason.

One such company used as a lever here, in uprooting communities and testing their products is Nestle.

Below is a wikipedia link (UN favoured and biased), but for expediency I have used it to show a little about what I am conveying here.

It isn't a matter of your "being a little dense." It is a matter of your not being a cradle Catholic.

Often, we Catholics just kind of take the things we believe for granted and are not often asked to explain what we believe and why we believe it to non-Catholic Christians.

Not many of them really want to know.

Necromancy is a form of divination involving the conjuring up of spirits.

Asking our fellow Christians or the Saints to pray for us is not.

God has not absolutely forbidden all contact with the dead because if He had, then Christ would not have appeared with Moses and Elias atop Mount Tabor while He was yet alive here on earth. Matt 17:3

Moreover, we Catholics interpret Revelation 5:8 to clearly indicate that the saints in heaven do actively intercede for us. We are explicitly told by John that the incense they offer to God are the prayers of the saints. Prayers are not physical things and cannot be physically offered to God. Thus the saints in heaven are offering our prayers to God mentally. In other words, they are interceding.

What God has forbidden is the necromantic practice of conjuring up spirits.

"There shall not be found among you any one who burns his son or his daughter as an offering, any one who practices divination, a soothsayer, or an augur, or a sorcerer, or a charmer, or a medium, or a wizard, or a necromancer. . . . For these nations, which you are about to dispossess, give heed to soothsayers and to diviners; but as for you, the Lord your God has not allowed you so to do. The Lord your God will raise up for you a prophet like me from among you, from your brethren—him you shall heed" (Deut. 18:10–15).

As one Catholic Christian writer put it:

"God thus indicates that one is not to conjure the dead for purposes of gaining information; one is to look to God’s prophets instead. Thus one is not to hold a seance. But anyone with an ounce of common sense can discern the vast qualitative difference between holding a seance to have the dead speak through you and a son humbly saying at his mother’s grave, "Mom, please pray to Jesus for me; I’m having a real problem right now." The difference between the two is the difference between night and day. One is an occult practice bent on getting secret information; the other is a humble request for a loved one to pray to God on one’s behalf."

This is no different that what a son might ask his mother to do if she were still alive here on earth.

Re:When the Scripture mentions predestination I see it as God knowing the end result and we don't, so He knows who will be saved and who will not. How else could He say that He is not willing that any should perish. God bless you,

This is correct.

There was a similar controversy concerning the relationship between grace and free will in the Catholic Church around the time of the Reformation between Luis de Molina and Domingo Banez.

The problem arising from God knowing which of His creatures will be saved without interfering with their free will is ultimately a mystery and goes beyond our understanding.

Again, C.S. Lewis said it best when he said:

Seeing somone do something is not the same thing as making him do something.

Anonymous 2:21 PM said..."Seems to me King Saul asked for help from Samuel, after the latter had fallen asleep. Poor Saul was just asking for some help, but was condemned to death for this particular act. Maybe Len could explain this one."

Saul was condmned to lose his throne foor disobedience in sparing Agag the Amalekite. Saul was not condemned to death. Please provide a reference chapter and verse.

When you build houses along fault lines, flood plains or below sea level, tornado-prone areas, then it is partly a man-made disaster. Add poor construction, it's like the Three Little Pigs.

Isn't it ironic that those who are poor seem more likely to live in disaster prone areas and lack resources to make their homes more structurally sound.

I think the words of Jesus are clear about what it means to be His disciple. Compassion and love. Remember what He said about love and who to love? Or don't the words of Jesus matter? The NAM claims they have the light and they have love. Jesus knew how to love and only Jesus is the true Light.

Jesus ascended into Heaven and will come again. In the meantime he left the world His church. And he gave His church the Holy Spirit so that we would be his hands and feet here on Earth.

Perhaps the world and the New Age Movement will use the tragedy in Haiti to advance its global governance and unholy religious agenda.

But what does Jesus say to the church in the face of this tragedy? What are we, His disciples, the ones who take up that cross to follow Him, what are we called to do? How would He have us respond?

I completely agree with you Susanna with regards Calvin. He never did repent for murdering Severtus by burning him at the stake with green-wood (so he would go more slowly).

He was a murderer like his father who was a murderer from the beginning.

Matthew 7:15-17 (King James Version)

15 Beware of false prophets, which come to you in sheep's clothing, but inwardly they are ravening wolves.

16 Ye shall know them by their fruits. Do men gather grapes of thorns, or figs of thistles?

17 Even so every good tree bringeth forth good fruit; but a corrupt tree bringeth forth evil fruit.

I find Calvinistic teaching, especially Hyper-Calvinism abominable and it makes me want to vomit that people do not understand the immense love of God. He did not make automata, but children who were free to choose or reject Him, because He wanted them to choose Him out of love. For God so loved the WORLD (it does not read 'Elect' here) that HE sent His Only Begotten Son that WHOSOEVER (Not a predestined 'elect') should believe on Him should not perish but have everlasting life.

Calvin took many of his teachings from Augustine. Luther also taught the same rubbish as Calvin regards predestination and their misunderstanding of it. Luther was a rabid Anti-Semite, responsible for the murder of many Jewish people.

Also, Calvin taught that it pleases God to send people to Hell, yet the Holy Bible tells us:

2 Peter 3:9

'The Lord is not slack concerning his promise, as some men count slackness; but is longsuffering to us-ward, not willing that any should perish, but that all should come to repentance.'

Let God be true and every man a liar!

Calvin obviously lied, following yet again after the Devil, who is the father of lies!

None of these men were Sola Scriptura, and their fruits were rotten! Luther also said that the Epistle of James was a book of straw. Well, I trust the teachings of St. James over Luther any day of the week thank you very much! I think I've a little more than 95 theses to hammer to his both his and Calvin's rotten door of Worms.

Romans 5:18 (King James Version)

18 Therefore as by the offence of one judgment came upon ALL MEN to condemnation; even so by the righteousness of one the free gift came upon ALL MEN unto justification of life.

http://www.bible.ca/calvinism.htm

http://www.evangelicaloutreach.org/calvinismrefuted.htm

http://www.evangelicaloutreach.org/spurgeon.htm

http://heresies.landmarkbiblebaptist.net/calvinism.htm

http://www.angelfire.com/planet/loveoneanothe/calvinism.html

http://www.angelfire.com/planet/loveoneanothe/slick.html

http://www.angelfire.com/planet/loveoneanothe/piper.html

http://allanturner.com/calbk_1.html

There are hundreds more, and all very convincing and most of such are scripturally sound as they refute the teachings of Calvin.

Susanna wwrote: "The problem arising from God knowing which of His creatures will be saved without interfering with their free will is ultimately a mystery and goes beyond our understanding."

The Talmud says, "Everything is foreseen (by God) but there is still free will." Foreseeing is merely recognition of uniqueness with respect to time; only one choice is possible and God knows what it will be. This differs from predestination which contains an implicit imperative that God controls that choice; that is predetermined or foreordained. These terms are far different than foreseen.

Maimonides said, in his Mishne Torah, Chapter 5:

1. Free will is granted every human. ... It is written, "Man has become like one of us, knowing good and evil" (Genesis 3:22). Humans are unique in ... intelligence and reason. No one prevents man from doing... as he pleases..."2. Do not think that God decrees, at a person' birth, that he be good or evil, [a very common notion]. Every human is capable of becoming righteous like Moses or wicked like Jeroboam, wise or foolish, merciful or cruel, niggardly or generous; and so on... The sinner causes his own ruin...4. ...If a person's destiny had been decreed from birth, or his innate makeup [orientation] draws him to something he cannot escape, what room would there be for the entire Torah?...

The world works by God's rules. They may confuse us but He set up the system to work the way it does. He created us to have free will. Even if He knows what our will will be, the world works *as if* He did not know, up to a point, because this is the way He willed it to work. *We* have options even if we can exercise only one at any one time.

In "Inner Space," by Aryeh Kaplan, he compares the system to a chess game between a master and a beginner. The beginner has free will while the master can predict the beginners every possible move and can counter it to bring the game to the conclusion the master intends. If the master wants to prolong the game, he can do so, though the beginner still has free will. At some point the beginner would be stuck and no longer have free will, just as in life. He cannot go back and do it over a different way, though he could have at the time. This is not quite the same as *knowing* each move, but it is almost the same. The Master wins by achieving perfection of the world.

Why did God not create perfect humans who would do His will the first time? We believe that God is perfect and makes no big blunders; that even evil has its purpose in creation.

“I form light and create darkness, I make peace and create evil. I, The Lord, do all these things. (Is. 45:7)”

“The Lord has made everything for His own purpose, and even the wicked for the day of evil. (Proverbs 16:4)”

This does not mean that God is evil or desires evil for its own sake. It is rather the way that He manages the world.

God will call the shots on particular occasions to further His plan for the world. This, in part, is what is described in Isaiah 45-47.” If He called the shots in minutiae, we would be robots. If He never called them at all, He would be irrelevant.

The same God who created the wicked has created a means for the wicked to repent and give up their wickedness. If they do not take advantage, they are fools. This theme is presented again and again. For example in Prov. 1:20-33:

“This wisdom cries aloud in the street; she raises her voice in the squares. She calls at the head of the noisy marketplace; at he entrance of the city gates she utters her words: ‘How long, you simpletons, will you love being misled? And how long will scorners delight in their scorning, and fools hate knowledge? Turn back at my reproof; behold I will pour out my spirit into you, I will make my words known to you. Because I have called and you have refused, I have stretched out my hand and no man paid heed, but you neglected all my counsel and would have none of my reproof... For the waywardness of the simpletons shall slay them and the complacency of fools shall destroy them. But whoever listens to me will dwell securely, and be tranquil without fear of evil.”

The viewpoint of Proverbs is not inconsistent with that of the Pentateuch: “Sin crouches at the door; its urge is towards you, yet you *can* be its master (Gen. 4:7).”

Another citation: “And you shall come to see the difference between the righteous and the wicked, between him who has served The Lord and him who has not served Him (Mal. 3:18).” This says that the wicked do not serve The Lord; right? Why would God “predestine” someone to counter His objectives?

Now we come to the difficult part: explaining Prov. 16:4 in consideration of Is. 43:7. Why did God “make” evil? Why did God create the wicked? Why did God call the evil Nebuchadnezzar his servant? Was it only so they could receive retribution?

With reference to Isaiah’s quote, Maimonides explains it in the Guide by noting the difference between existence and non-existence (Part 3, Ch. 10). There are two kinds of non-existence, the first being absolute non-existence, and the second, the absence of a property. The latter are considered as opposites; such as blindness and sight, death and life, heat and cold. We can say that someone who removed a certain property caused the opposite to happen; i.e., removal of a light causes darkness.

WR to the Isaiah citation, note that a different word is used (in Hebrew as well) for the positive and negative property. The Hebrew is, “Yo-tzair ohr (Who forms light) oo-vo-ray khoshekh (and creates darkness) o-say shalom (Who makes peace) oo-vo-ray rah (and creates evil).” Maimonides notes in this connection: “Darkness and evil are non-existing things. Consider that Isaiah does *not* say, I make (o-say) darkness, I make (o-say) evil, because darkness and evil are not things in positive existence to which the verb “to make” would apply. The verb, “bara” (He created) is used because, in Hebrew, this verb is applied to non-existent things, e.g., “In the beginning God created... (Gen. 1:1)” Here, the creation took place from nothing...

The so-called evil is only in relation to good; the absence of goodness. All evils are negations It therefore “cannot be said of God that He directly creates evil, or that He has the direct intention to produce evil; this is impossible. His works are all perfectly good (Gen. 1:31) for He only produces being and being is good.” Our perception of death being evil is directly dependent on man’s being made as a corporeal being, capable of dying. Death is, here, the loss of life. This is why the Talmud can say, “Nothing evil descends from above.”

The so-called evils inflicted on Israel are therefore based on removal of Divine protection, and not inflictions in themselves (though, to the victims, the difference is admittedly moot).

The possibility of evil derives exactly from free will, which is one of the salient factors that characterizes man as being in God’s image. For God to protect us perfectly from evil would be to make us robots.

Deut. 32:11 compares God’s protection of Israel to that of an eagle hovering over its young. The word y’ra-khayf, “hovering,” is used in only one other place in scripture, Gen. 1:2, “... and God’s spirit hovered (m’ra-kefet) over the face of the waters.” The metaphor is that of an eagle staying sufficiently close to offer protection, but not close enough to smother. This is like a parent allowing a young child to try to walk and take the risk that he will fall. At the same time, the parent tries to help the child learn to walk. This God did through Revelation.

Otherwise you may call Him Jesus: “In Late Latin Jesus was original spelled Iesus; In Greek it was spelled Ièsous; and in ancient Hebrew spelled “yÈshÙa,” which is a contraction of yehÖshÙa (Joshua), help of Jehovah < yÀh, Jehovah + hÖshïa, to help.”

'I have been concerned about certain forces within the Hebrew Roots movement and where this is leading. While understanding the Hebrew foundation of Christianity is something all Christians should pursue, there is something sinister going on below the surface. There seems to be an attempt to draw Christians away from the simplicity of the Gospel back under the Old Covenant (Law) into Judaism. Eventually, I believe the result for those who are absorbed into this movement will be forsaking the only begotten Son of God for another “Yeshua” who was just a Jewish sage. The destination seems to be the same as the Jesus Seminar, it is just arrived at via another route. I realize that this is a tough statement. But, after interaction with several who have been involved in this movement for some time, I am convinced it is accurate.

"One of the subtle attacks on the Christian Faith comes from the notion that the New Testament was not written in Greek, but in "Hebrew." This may seem benign at first, but it is not. It is an attack on the reliability of the text of your Bible. If the Greek text is unreliable and has been corrupted by Greeks, as is charged by some, there is no longer a standard of truth. The Protestant cry of "Sola Scriptura" is meaningless unless we have a historically stable and reliable text. Once the New Testament itself is discredited, the rope tying your boat to the dock has been severed, and you are bound to be “carried about with every wind of doctrine.” ”We must pay more careful attention, therefore, to what we have heard, so that we do not drift away.” [Heb. 2:1].

No ancient Hebrew manuscript of the New Testament has ever been found from the early centuries of Christianity. The oldest are Greek. The oldest papyrus fragment [a portion of the Gospel of John] dates back to the late second century. So the manuscript evidence alone weighs heavily against the concept of Hebrew “originals.” The proponents of the Hebrew New Testament claim that internal evidence suggests the original language of the text was “Hebrew.” Actually, the “Hebrew” of the Torah was not widely spoken at the time of Christ. It was the language of the Jewish scholars, but not widely spoken by common Jewish folk.'

'Some websites that claim to be "Messianic" are promoting the myth, proclaimed by the "sacred name" cults, that the name "Jesus" means "son of Zeus." This is a lie, and a blatant attack on the name of our Savior. There is absolutely no credible historic evidence that Jesus' name has anything whatsoever to do with Zeus. The only connection is a similarity in part of the sound in the English language.'

I truly believe in trying to address the Messiah by his proper name, however, as you have shown, there are differences of opinion about what the exact pronunciation or spelling is. Trying to get it as correct as possible is desirable and a reasonable enough goal when addressing the Son of The Most High.

I have not been 100% convinced on any of the explanations about the pronunciation. There are several reasons for this: when Hebrew is transliterated it is often with large variants in spelling, and considering that the original did not have vowels and still doesn't in many sources, the nuance of the vowel pointings seems like a somewhat unprovable point. My hope is to at least improve on the hellenistic name used for Him.

Since The Messiah was Jewish, His name would obviously be Hebrew. Is there or has there ever been a Hebrew boy named Jesus? What is the meaning of the name Jesus? All the Biblical names have a meaning. His would most certainly be no different.

On the article about the Hebrew Roots Movement taking people into the Old Covenant, I'm wondering if the Old Covenant was good enough for The Messiah to live under, why isn't it good enough for His followers to live under?

If you reexamine His teachings He did not abolish the Old Covenant or "the law". He actually ADDED to the requirements and standards with the RENEWED Covenant. He said (I'm paraphrasing) "it is written......but I say to you that even if you THINK of doing such a thing you are guilty of it."

Not only are we not to commit sin - break the "laws" in a natural or actual way, but we are not to break them in our hearts (or minds) either. That sure sounds like He was upholding "the law".

The interpretation doesn't even make sense unless in your dictionary the word abolish is listed under the definition for fulfill.

If the Old Covenant is abolished why do we still say that homosexuality or bestiality is wrong? Why is murder wrong? Why is adultery wrong? Isn't the Old Covenant the place where these wrongs were defined as being so?

How is it man gets to pick and choose which of the "laws" found in the Old Testament he wants to follow and throw out the rest? Like the law of tithing, the churches will never tell you that one was abolished! If you look at it carefully you will see that the commandments that were discarded are the "Jewish" ones. Therefore, modern christianity itself by its very nature is anti-Semitic.

Thank you for the complement, Rob. Maybe you will not think this one makes sense but here goes:

You wrote: "If you reexamine His teachings He did not abolish the Old Covenant or "the law". He actually ADDED to the requirements and standards with the RENEWED Covenant. He said (I'm paraphrasing) "it is written......but I say to you that even if you THINK of doing such a thing you are guilty of it." Not only are we not to commit sin - break the "laws" in a natural or actual way, but we are not to break them in our hearts (or minds) either. That sure sounds like He was upholding "the law".

What Jesus said is, from a Jewish viewpoint, wrong on two counts: First, Deut. 4:2 says:

Do not add to the word which I command you, nor diminish from it, to observe the commandments of the Lord your God which I command you.

Since, as you said, he added to it he violatrd the above verse.

Second, it is not a sin to think of doing something wrong; just of actually DOING it. We cannot help what we think. The only thinking sin I know of is to covet. But coveting may involve more than just thinking what your neighbor has is nice; rather fantacizing how to get it.

One cannot help his thoughts because the evil inclination is real and ever present. The sages held that the evil impulse is just the disposition of the human resulting from God-given natural instincts, especially sexual desire. Consequently it is not inherently bad since God creates only what is good. It is evil only when misused.

Gen. 4:6 And the Lord said to Cain, "Why are you annoyed, and why has your countenance fallen? 7 Is it not so that if you improve, it will be forgiven you? If you do not improve, however, sin is lying at the door, and to you is its longing, but you can rule over it.

The Talmud says "Were it not for that [sinful] impulse a man would not build a house, get married, beget children or conduct business." The answer is "because it's the law." If you do good becaused your heart says to, you may do evil for the same reason and rationalize it. Following the law makes you more reliable.

The Talmud asks, "Is it better to follow a law because your heart tells you to or because it's a law?"

Judaism is more of a religion of deed rather than creed; the opposite of Christianity. We demand that people give a 10-percent tithe to charity. Charity is a Christian word from the Greek "carate (sp?)" which means, "from the heart."

There is no Hebrew word for charity. The nearest thing, "tzedakah," means "justice," or "righteousness." Do we prefer that someone give from the heart? Of course we do. But if we wait for the heart we may wait a long time. We say that people should give whatever the state of their hearts. If your heart catches up; all well and good. In the meantime you will be helping people.

Is it better for someone to give 5% or 15% from his heart or 10% because the law says so? The Talmud prefers the latter because the person is more reliable. A person who gives from his heart one day may decide not to on another day. A person who follows the law is more reliable, at least in principle.

Judaism is an education system; training and discipline for goodness. At the same time we teach and encourage belief in, and love for, the Source of the law. "Fear of The Lord is the beginning of knowledge; fools despise wisdom and discipline. (Prov. 1:7)"

Fulfill means not only to carry out but it also means to accomplish. Jesus Christ became the ultimate sacrifice for us, we no longer therefore need to carry out blood sacrifice with animals. Here the law is fulfilled, it is not done away with, but rather is perfected through Christ Jesus and what He did for us in taking our sins upon the cross. That is why He said, Eloi, Eloi, lama sabachthani, (see: http://www.biblestudy.org/question/meaning-of-eli-eli-lama-sabachthani-spoken-by-jesus.html )

He then said,'It is finished', i.e., accomplished, fulfilled.

Not one jot nor tittle of the law was done away with, rather Jesus Christ fulfilled it PERFECTLY, including his healing others on the Sabbath, showing that the Sabbath is a day, and always had been a day, for good and not evil to be done. We can work out through Scripture that it is probable He was conceived on the Festival of Lights and born at the beginning of the eight day Feast of the Tabernacles, or Sukkot. He is the Light of the World and came and tabernacled (dwelt) among us. He was crucified at Passover (Pesach) and rose again after the high Sabbath (double?).

These Jewish feasts were a foreshadowing of God's promise to save mankind and reconcile mankind to Him through the sacrifice of His unblemished Son. These feasts too were fulfilled. He, Jesus Christ, is the Light whose power shines through all who dwell (tabernacle, take shelter) in Him and He dwells in them, causing such as have repented to Him to be as lamps with His light shining through them.

1 For I would that ye knew what great conflict I have for you, and for them at Laodicea, and for as many as have not seen my face in the flesh;

2 That their hearts might be comforted, being knit together in love, and unto all riches of the full assurance of understanding, to the acknowledgement of the mystery of God, and of the Father, and of Christ;

3 In whom are hid all the treasures of wisdom and knowledge.

4 And this I say, lest any man should beguile you with enticing words.

5 For though I be absent in the flesh, yet am I with you in the spirit, joying and beholding your order, and the stedfastness of your faith in Christ.

6 As ye have therefore received Christ Jesus the Lord, so walk ye in him:

7 Rooted and built up in him, and stablished in the faith, as ye have been taught, abounding therein with thanksgiving.

8 Beware lest any man spoil you through philosophy and vain deceit, after the tradition of men, after the rudiments of the world, and not after Christ.

9 For in him dwelleth all the fulness of the Godhead bodily.

10 And ye are complete in him, which is the head of all principality and power:

11 In whom also ye are circumcised with the circumcision made without hands, in putting off the body of the sins of the flesh by the circumcision of Christ:

12 Buried with him in baptism, wherein also ye are risen with him through the faith of the operation of God, who hath raised him from the dead.

13 And you, being dead in your sins and the uncircumcision of your flesh, hath he quickened together with him, having forgiven you all trespasses;

14 Blotting out the handwriting of ordinances that was against us, which was contrary to us, and took it out of the way, nailing it to his cross;

15 And having spoiled principalities and powers, he made a shew of them openly, triumphing over them in it.

16 Let no man therefore judge you in meat, or in drink, or in respect of an holyday, or of the new moon, or of the sabbath days:

17 Which are a shadow of things to come; but the body is of Christ.

18 Let no man beguile you of your reward in a voluntary humility and worshipping of angels, intruding into those things which he hath not seen, vainly puffed up by his fleshly mind,

19 And not holding the Head, from which all the body by joints and bands having nourishment ministered, and knit together, increaseth with the increase of God.

20 Wherefore if ye be dead with Christ from the rudiments of the world, why, as though living in the world, are ye subject to ordinances,

21(Touch not; taste not; handle not;

22 Which all are to perish with the using;) after the commandments and doctrines of men?

23 Which things have indeed a shew of wisdom in will worship, and humility, and neglecting of the body: not in any honour to the satisfying of the flesh.

The spiritual meaning of these feasts is fulfilled in Jesus Christ, they are not abolished but are now obtained directly through dwelling in Him. The Sabbath too is ultimately fulfilled in Him as we find rest in His Love and by being clothed in His Righteousness through trusting in Him and obeying His Commandments, namely to Love God with all your heart and all your strength and all your soul and all your understanding. And to love your neighbour as yourself.

To deny that Christ PERFECTED the works, and not to admit that all our righteousness is as filthy rags before Him, means that we are rejecting God's Grace through Christ Jesus which is offered to cleanse us totally and cover us in His PERFECT Righteousness.

23 And they also, IF THEY ABIDE NOT STILL IN UNBELIEF, shall be grafted in: for God is able to graft them in again.

24 For if thou wert cut out of the olive tree which is wild by nature, and wert grafted contrary to nature into a good olive tree: how much more shall these, which be the natural branches, be grafted into their own olive tree?

25 For I would not, brethren, that ye should be ignorant of this mystery, lest ye should be wise in your own conceits; that blindness in part is happened to Israel, until the fulness of the Gentiles be come in.

26 And so all Israel shall be saved: as it is written, There shall come out of Sion the Deliverer, and shall turn away ungodliness from Jacob:

27 FOR THIS IS MY COVENANT UNTO THEM, WHEN I SHALL TAKE AWAY THEIR SINS.

28 As concerning the gospel, they are enemies for your sakes: but as touching the election, they are beloved for the father's sakes.

29 For the gifts and calling of God are without repentance.

30 For as ye in times past have not believed God, yet have now obtained mercy through their unbelief:

31 Even so have these also now not believed, that through your mercy they also may obtain mercy.

32 For God hath concluded them all in unbelief, that he might have mercy upon all.

33 O the depth of the riches both of the wisdom and knowledge of God! how unsearchable are his judgments, and his ways past finding out!

34 For who hath known the mind of the Lord? or who hath been his counsellor?

35 Or who hath first given to him, and it shall be recompensed unto him again?

36 For of him, and through him, and to him, are all things: to whom be glory for ever. Amen.

CONT. (Rob in London)...

I have given you the evidence showing that the philological make up of The Name Ièsous has the same meaning as Yeshua. You are right about the Consonants, but wrong about your pronunciation. There are NO manuscripts of Aramaic or Hebrew of the New Testament in antiquity. All are Greek in linguistic origin. That's just a fact.

It was common in antiquity for names to be changed according to language, especially where the original meaning of a name is kept, and is only a recent thing that such has not happened.

http://www.spiritualfoundations.com/Vol2OldTestament/PartIVolII.html

If you find this 'modern' Christianity Anti-Semitic, then perhaps you should consider that this is the Christianity found in the oldest manuscripts which are in Greek, and were originally written by Jews (the Apostles, undr the divine guidance of a Jew, Jesus Christ our Lord, in this language!

"Thank you for the complement, Rob. Maybe you will not think this one makes sense but here goes:

You wrote: "If you reexamine His teachings He did not abolish the Old Covenant or "the law". He actually ADDED to the requirements and standards with the RENEWED Covenant. "

Dear Len,

(Smiles... I'm tired too, it's 8:17 AM here)

I did complement you, Peace and Blessings to you, I did not, however, write the thread at 12:56 AM, from where you have taken the quote to which you have now responded. The anonymous blogger at 12:56, was addressing me ... it is not me who has written it. He was responding to my earlier thread which I had posted at 11:30 PM.

The comments I have written from 2:47 AM up to 3:01 AM, are in response to Anonymous at 12:56 AM, although they come after your post (which I had not seen till now).

I do think, however, that my posts here are relevant also in relation to your points. However, I will allow Anonymous to answer for himself or herself in relation to your post at 2:46 AM (15.01.10), as your post is in response to something Anonymous at 12:56 PM has written and not something I have written. Sorry to spell it out like this, I'm not trying to be patronising, I'm just incredibly tired and this is the only way I can be sure for myself that I have clarified my points.

Re:The so-called evil is only in relation to good; the absence of goodness.

We are in perfect agrement on this. The Catholic Church defines evil as "the privation of a good which ought to be present."

In other words evil is a parasite upon the good.

We base our beliefs on that fine pinpoint of reality revealed by God to Moses atop Mount Horeb. Exodus 3:14

By itself, evil is nothing. There can be good without evil (there was good without evil before the Fall and good without evil in Heaven) but evil cannot exist apart from the good.

This was the teaching of St. Thomas Aquinas who was very much influenced by the great Rabbi Maimonides.

St. Thomas was also influenced greatly by St. Augustine who taught that God is so good that He wouldn't even allow evil to occur if He were not able to bring forth from every evil an immensely greater good.

Regarding your comment:

The so-called evils inflicted on Israel are therefore based on removal of Divine protection, and not inflictions in themselves (though, to the victims, the difference is admittedly moot).

Again, exactly correct. By their occasional collective wicked behavior, the people of Israel were in effect freely telling God to leave them alone......so He did.

May times we likewise see catastrophic chastisements of "Biblical" proportions in terms of something God "does" to us. And in a way it is....but only indirectly when, as you said, God withdraws His Divine protection and allows man to experience the consequences of his evil choices. God's worst punishment is to simply leave man to his own devices.

But the reason we usually think otherwise is because our thinking is upside down. We are often quick to see the "Hand of God" in such catastrophes, but, as C.S. Lewis once put it, we fail to see the "Hand of God" in the fact that such catastrophes do not happen more often.

One more thing on free will with which I think we also agree. Free will is self-evident by the fact that from the very beginning laws have always existed......both before AND after the Fall.

If we have no free will, what's the point in legislating things that we can't help doing or not doing anyway?

"Judaism is more of a religion of deed rather than creed; the opposite of Christianity. We demand that people give a 10-percent tithe to charity. "

Len,

Catholic Christianity is not a religion of creed or even a religion. It does have a creed, but it's actually a distinct view on reality. Once you understand this, Christian doctrines start making sense.

"One more thing on free will with which I think we also agree. Free will is self-evident by the fact that from the very beginning laws have always existed......both before AND after the Fall.

If we have no free will, what's the point in legislating things that we can't help doing or not doing anyway?

LOL "Laws for robots" seems like an oxymoron to me."

Very well said Susanna! I do believe man is given free-will to obey or reject God, I also believe, however that the FULNESS of such freewill (I'm not really contradicting myself here, nor necessarily do I contradict your point above)with the Laws of God written on our hearts thorugh our dwelling in Christ Jesus and He in us (To love God with all our Heart, soul, strength and understanding and to love our neighbours as ourselves, upon which, all the law is dependent), can only be truly realised when we are believing in and obeying God.

We know that Jesus Christ SETS US FREE so that we are free indeed! Man has freewill but this free will is severely hampered by sin, and as no man can ever be truly independent he is either dependent on God or is in the captivity of sin and the wiles of the Devil, he still has depending how far he has gone, a degree of freewill to do 'good' as in the case of the 'good' Samaritan. What Calvinists confuse here, is that they believe man does not have ANY freewill, because they insist on qualifying freewill as having to mean Total freewill. Otherwise, they cannot see how the will can be free. Analogously, in society we have certain freedoms afforded us by the State, we do not have total freedom (we don't have the freedom to rob, to murder ((and often freedoms which democratically should be allowed, such as the right to protest, are limited to varying degrees depending how oppressive or supportive a given governmentary system is), we do however have some freedoms. Therefore, although we do not have total freedom, we still, to varying degrees, have limited freedom. This is the same with freewill.

Even when dwelling in Jesus Christ our Lord and Saviour, we must often battle against the lusts and fears of the flesh. Jesus Christ offers us through His Righteousness, and relying in His Strength, a way to overcome, and if we trust fully in Him, we can, but we still have to fight battles, the actuality of such battles is often against our freewill, we do not want to be tempted and struggle, yet in Jesus Christ our freewill is intact because we can overcome such temptations. However, man outside of God is not Utterly wicked and without any freewill to choose, that is Calvinist nonsense! For example, a man helping a little old lady (maybe on her way to church) across the road out of love, or out of love making sure she is safe after a fall, is not showing utter wickedness is he? The Devil and his demonic legions are utterly wicked, not man; but man has fallen short of the Glory of God, is not worthy of God, and man's righteousness is as filthy rags before God. Yet through the totally free gift of Salvation through Jesus Christ, being covered in His Righteousness and upheld in His Strength, we can be set free and be free indeed.

In short, both the erroneous belief that man has no freewill and the erroneous belief that man has total freewill, denies futilly the Majesty and Glory and Righteousness and Love of God! Man has, therefore, to varying degrees, freewill, it is not total but it is freewill nonetheless, and is fully realised, although not total freewill as man has to often put off the old and put on the new by relying in Jesus Christ even in times of struggle, so when man, with his limited freewill repents to Him and God helps Man in this by lovingly prompting man to repent (not forcing 'irresistably') and when man does, God then cleanses and upholds man, encouraging man and equipping man so that man can obey Him. (as man morally must, but has the freewill to not do so, and therefore be cast out of God's presence, until that man repents again).

We are told that it is by our FRUITS not just our Words that Christians are to be known/identified.

Christianity in truth is completely about deeds. These deeds are governed not so much by creed, if at all, but by a personal relationship with the Father, through Jesus Christ our Lord and saviour, we must rely on the ENTIRETY and SPIRIT if Holy Scripture, which we can only truly do by relying ENTIRELY on Jesus Christ renewing our hearts and minds through the Power of His blood and through the Power of the Holy Spirit which as the Holy living breath/mind of God renews our minds.

We must OBEY Him!

Matthew 25 (King James Version)

1 Then shall the kingdom of heaven be likened unto ten virgins, which took their lamps, and went forth to meet the bridegroom.

2 And five of them were wise, and five were foolish.

3 They that were foolish took their lamps, and took no oil with them:

4 But the wise took oil in their vessels with their lamps.

5 While the bridegroom tarried, they all slumbered and slept.

6 And at midnight there was a cry made, Behold, the bridegroom cometh; go ye out to meet him.

7 Then all those virgins arose, and trimmed their lamps.

8 And the foolish said unto the wise, Give us of your oil; for our lamps are gone out.

9 But the wise answered, saying, Not so; lest there be not enough for us and you: but go ye rather to them that sell, and buy for yourselves.

10 And while they went to buy, the bridegroom came; and they that were ready went in with him to the marriage: and the door was shut.

11 Afterward came also the other virgins, saying, Lord, Lord, open to us.

12 But he answered and said, Verily I say unto you, I know you not.

13 Watch therefore, for ye know neither the day nor the hour wherein the Son of man cometh.

14 For the kingdom of heaven is as a man travelling into a far country, who called his own servants, and delivered unto them his goods.

15 And unto one he gave five talents, to another two, and to another one; to every man according to his several ability; and straightway took his journey.

16 Then he that had received the five talents went and traded with the same, and made them other five talents.

17 And likewise he that had received two, he also gained other two.

18 But he that had received one went and digged in the earth, and hid his lord's money.

19 After a long time the lord of those servants cometh, and reckoneth with them.

20 And so he that had received five talents came and brought other five talents, saying, Lord, thou deliveredst unto me five talents: behold, I have gained beside them five talents more.

32 And before him shall be gathered all nations: and he shall separate them one from another, as a shepherd divideth his sheep from the goats:

33 And he shall set the sheep on his right hand, but the goats on the left.

34 Then shall the King say unto them on his right hand, Come, ye blessed of my Father, inherit the kingdom prepared for you from the foundation of the world:

35 For I was an hungred, and ye gave me meat: I was thirsty, and ye gave me drink: I was a stranger, and ye took me in:

36 Naked, and ye clothed me: I was sick, and ye visited me: I was in prison, and ye came unto me.

37 Then shall the righteous answer him, saying, Lord, when saw we thee an hungred, and fed thee? or thirsty, and gave thee drink?

38 When saw we thee a stranger, and took thee in? or naked, and clothed thee?

39 Or when saw we thee sick, or in prison, and came unto thee?

40 And the King shall answer and say unto them, Verily I say unto you, Inasmuch as ye have done it unto one of the least of these my brethren, ye have done it unto me.

41 Then shall he say also unto them on the left hand, Depart from me, ye cursed, into everlasting fire, prepared for the devil and his angels:

42 For I was an hungred, and ye gave me no meat: I was thirsty, and ye gave me no drink:

43 I was a stranger, and ye took me not in: naked, and ye clothed me not: sick, and in prison, and ye visited me not.

44 Then shall they also answer him, saying, Lord, when saw we thee an hungred, or athirst, or a stranger, or naked, or sick, or in prison, and did not minister unto thee?

45 Then shall he answer them, saying, Verily I say unto you, Inasmuch as ye did it not to one of the least of these, ye did it not to me.

46 And these shall go away into everlasting punishment: but the righteous into life eternal.

Peace be with you Len, blessings, Matthew 25 exemplifies the Spirit of Christianity, and is about deeds done out of love. Firstly, out of a fearful yet trusting Love of God, and secondly out of a love of others, doing unto them as we would rightly have done unto ourselves; everything depends on this, and must be done in Christ Jesus, repenting of our sins, being cleansed in his blood and renewed (born again) by the Holy Spirit, and then dwelling in Him, and he in us, obedient to Him and reliant on His Righteousness and Strength to cause us to bear good fruit (doing good deeds in love, and with a clean heart and truthful speaking), preaching the Good News of the Gospel.

A lot of people are confused why one has to believe in Christ to be rigtheous, when morality existed before Christianity.

What theists call "God" is simply the external world of reality that exists independent of what people think. Idealism says there's no objective reality, so we create our own realities. Buddhism for example, has no god, no objective reality.

Reality is not confined to a book called the Bible. It's in the created world.

Flannary O'Connor called Dogma, the instrument used to penetrate reality. The habit of being is seeing things as they are. God is being or existence.

G. K. Chesterton said that if we practised the habit of being "seeing things as they are", we can see Christianity being played out in the universe, because the human story is a story of sin and redemption. It's also His-story, or the story of Christ. Creation, Fall, Sin and Redemption, are not just concepts, but realities that we see being played out in the universe, over and over again.

Christians are often so concerned with getting to heaven, that we fail to live on earth, or see God working in it. If the world became "flesh" and dwelt amonst us, then the world is God's arena, and God sanctifies the world using the materials in the world.

I find the idea that we can be saved spiritually, a bit Gnostic, The Gnostics claim the Jesus never had a physcial body, but only took on cor-operal one. if God wanted us to live in a purely spiritual world, he would not have created us with bodies, we would have been like the Angels.

Body and soul are distinct realities, but they are one substance. The Apostles Creed says" We believe in the resurrection of the body."

I hope you don't take offence, but I find the Protestant concept of Jesus only, without a church or the sacraments, like placing mind before matter, or knowledge before existence. We need concrete examples of God's presence in the world. Like I said if God wanted us to live in a spiritual world, he would not have given us bodies, to experience realities of the world.

On the question of asking the saints for intercessory pryaers - its justified by the "communion of saints"- which is in the New Testament - when we enter into prayer asking our brother and sisters who have passed on to eternal life, we enter into communion with the saints - it is biblical and not conjuring - "the prayer of a righteous man avails much" - we are asking the most rightous of all to pray for us - and frankly it seems to me that if the saints are alive in Christ they are therefore more alive than those of us who stil remain in this "valley of tears" - just my two cents:}God Bless you allMelinda

I enjoyed your commentaries, sorry to have confused the two of you as to who was writing to whom.

I respect your research in the background of the greek name for Yahshuah/Yeshua/Yahushua but still will not without struggle address the Kosher Jewish Rabbi Messiah Yahshuah by a greek name if I can help it.

There is no such thing as "original" greek manuscripts. Every one we have is a copy from some earlier time. Does it make sense for a Jewish Rabbi's life (no less the Messiah) to be written in greek only and not in Hebrew? Especially since the apostles were Jews as well? That would be like trying to study biology in english and all the textbooks are written in chinese.

At best you might be able to say that they were written in both Hebrew and greek and only most of the greek ones survived. I have an english translation of the du Tillet Hebrew MatitYahu. There are two other Hebrew Matthews, The Shem Tov and the Munster. And who knows what's hiding in the Vatican library?!

Hebrew IS the inspired language. It's the language The Heavenly Father chose to reveal Himself through, why wouldn't He choose to reveal His only begotten son and the savior of the world through that same language? If He was up for that much of an overhaul, why didn't he give "Jesus" a greek mother?

Joh 5:43 I am come in my Father's name, and ye receive me not: if another shall come in his own name, him ye will receive.

He came IN His Father's name: Yahshuah in the name of Yahuah.

Savvy made a good point too, although I disagree with the conclusion - that we need a church or sacraments. Yah created us as mortal, and the angels as spiritual. Why would He make the angels as spirit in heaven, without the tests of physical life and make us physical with the goal of becoming a spirit and going to heaven? Why not just make us all spirit in heaven to begin with?

Of course, one could argue that the spiritual beings, angels, were tempted with the physical world, the outcome of which is the fall and nephilim. And that physical mortals are tempted with the spiritual world, pursuing the dark arts, consulting of spirits, building towers to the heavens and trying to become gods.

1Co 15:40 There are also celestial bodies, and bodies terrestrial: but the esteem of the celestial is one, and the esteem of the terrestrial is another.

After I posted I was troubled deeply that I had made the statement that Yashuaha added to the law, which is forbidden, - to add to, take away from, or abolish. That is why many people do not see Jesus as the messiah, because the law, Torah, can never be changed. His Word is eternal.

It was written in stone....

I should have used the words "expounded upon" - meaning, explained further. My heart is deeply grieved that I made this error in regards to HaMashiach.

Although I would like to agree that there is a difference in acting out a sin and thinking of sinning, couldn't it be said that almost all sin is first thought out, then committed? Except perhaps for "crimes of passion"? It is good to begin with obediance because of the fear of consequences or just a desire to do the "right thing". But eventually one should have a true change of heart, where disobediance is distasteful. Where we abhor what Elohim abhors. Where what was once written in stone is now written in our hearts. This is what Yahshuah taught.

A lot of people are confused why one has to believe in Christ to be rigtheous, when morality existed before Christianity.'

Dear Savvy, Christianity is the fulfilment of Tanachal Judaism. Therefore your premise, 'when morality existed before Christianity', is misleading and unwarranted in its unjustifiably circumvented assumption.

Moreover, although we have the good Samaritan as a Biblical example of morality existing outside traditional Tanachal Judaism (The Samaritans followed Judaism but deviated from its normative rituals), to my knowledge, we have no examples of 'moral' men and women in the Holy Bible that have not harkened unto God. It can be seen throughout the history of such cultures not under the influence of Tanachal Judaism and Christianity, that the rulers & the general populace were barbaric, perverted and very blood-thirsty indeed. There have, however, been those human beings who as individuals, despite their cultural surrounds, sought after God and obeyed their consciences as best as they could.

Jesus Christ really is God, and has always been God. Neither Tanachal Judaism nor its fulfilment in Biblical Christianity are the invention of men. Rather, it is the testimony of the living inspiration of God working through the lives of men who chose to seek and obey Him, and submit themselves to the guidance of His Holy Spirit.

'Flannary O'Connor called Dogma, the instrument used to penetrate reality. The habit of being is seeing things as they are. God is being or existence.'

Firstly, I would be very careful with Flannary O'Connor. She and her writings are heavily influenced by the French Jesuit and father of the New Age movement, Pierre Teilhard de Chardin.

Rather than 'dogma' (the traditions of men) helping us to 'penetrate reality', one requires a living faitt in Jesus Christ our Lord and Saviour, that allows one to declare, I was blind but now I see. Such a faith is real by its hope and trust in God and His Biblical revelations & promises through Jesus Christ our Lord and Saviour & what Jesus Christ did for mankind on the cross, and through a real and personal living relationship with Him. Such are the traditions we are Biblically exhorted to hold on to. Not getting caught up in the vain traditons and philosophies of men.

'G. K. Chesterton said that if we practised the habit of being "seeing things as they are", we can see Christianity being played out in the universe, because the human story is a story of sin and redemption. It's also His-story, or the story of Christ. Creation, Fall, Sin and Redemption, are not just concepts, but realities that we see being played out in the universe, over and over again.'

There is some truth in what Chesterton is saying, but his context is somewhat gnostic and self-indulgent.

'Christians are often so concerned with getting to heaven, that we fail to live on earth, or see God working in it. If the world became "flesh" and dwelt amonst us, then the world is God's arena, and God sanctifies the world using the materials in the world.'

We are to store up our treasures in Heaven, as Christians we are told by Jesus Christ that we are to be in the World but not of it. We are to be a holy people.

I see some merit in your first few sentences here,('Christians are often so concerned with getting to heaven, that we fail to live on earth, or see God working in it.') however, I can only afford such merit by framing our living on Earth in terms of being obedient to God and loving our neighbours as ourselves. We are also to preach the word of God, and tell the World about the Good News of the Word of God having become flesh dwelt among us and died on the cross for our sins, then He this Living Word, our Lord and Saviour Jesus Christ, rising from the dead, and how believing in Him and obeying and trusting in Him, we can overcome and be dead to sin and alive in Chist Jesus.

We cannot do this by consistently hiding away in, for example, some monastery somewhere.

'I find the idea that we can be saved spiritually, a bit Gnostic, The Gnostics claim the Jesus never had a physcial body, but only took on cor-operal one. if God wanted us to live in a purely spiritual world, he would not have created us with bodies, we would have been like the Angels.'

You may find the 'idea' which I will call the reality of being saved spiritually, 'a bit gnostic', but God is omniscient and He reveals this to us in His word, Holy Scripture, and through His Word, Jesus Christ, in Holy Scripture.

'Christians are often so concerned with getting to heaven, that we fail to live on earth, or see God working in it. If the world became "flesh" and dwelt amonst us, then the world is God's arena, and God sanctifies the world using the materials in the world.'

God sanctifies the World through the precious blood of His Only Begotten Son, Lord Jesus Christ. We are in the World but we are not to be of it. We are called to be a holy people, spiritually separate from the World although physically still in it. We have to live on Earth as living examples of the power of God to change us from people enslaved to sin to being people who are more than conquerers in Jesus Christ, obedient to His Commands and upheld by His Strength, covered by His Righteousness through His shed blood, and we are now able to overcome sin.

1 Peter, an apostle of Jesus Christ, to the strangers scattered throughout Pontus, Galatia, Cappadocia, Asia, and Bithynia,

2 Elect according to the foreknowledge of God the Father, through sanctification of the Spirit, unto obedience and sprinkling of the blood of Jesus Christ: Grace unto you, and peace, be multiplied.

3 Blessed be the God and Father of our Lord Jesus Christ, which according to his abundant mercy hath begotten us again unto a lively hope by the resurrection of Jesus Christ from the dead,

4 To an inheritance incorruptible, and undefiled, and that fadeth not away, reserved in heaven for you,

5 Who are kept by the power of God through faith unto salvation ready to be revealed in the last time.

6 Wherein ye greatly rejoice, though now for a season, if need be, ye are in heaviness through manifold temptations:

7 That the trial of your faith, being much more precious than of gold that perisheth, though it be tried with fire, might be found unto praise and honour and glory at the appearing of Jesus Christ:

8 Whom having not seen, ye love; in whom, though now ye see him not, yet believing, ye rejoice with joy unspeakable and full of glory:

9 Receiving the end of your faith, even the salvation of your souls.

10 Of which salvation the prophets have enquired and searched diligently, who prophesied of the grace that should come unto you:

11 Searching what, or what manner of time the Spirit of Christ which was in them did signify, when it testified beforehand the sufferings of Christ, and the glory that should follow.

12 Unto whom it was revealed, that not unto themselves, but unto us they did minister the things, which are now reported unto you by them that have preached the gospel unto you with the Holy Ghost sent down from heaven; which things the angels desire to look into.

13 Wherefore gird up the loins of your mind, be sober, and hope to the end for the grace that is to be brought unto you at the revelation of Jesus Christ;

14 As obedient children, not fashioningyourselves according to the former lusts in your ignorance:

15 But as he which hath called you is holy, so be ye holy in all manner of conversation;

16 Because it is written, Be ye holy; for I am holy.

17 And if ye call on the Father, who without respect of persons judgeth according to every man's work, pass the time of your sojourning here in fear:

18 Forasmuch as ye know that ye were not redeemed with corruptible things, as silver and gold, from your vain conversation received by tradition from your fathers;

19 But with the precious blood of Christ, as of a lamb without blemish and without spot:

20 Who verily was foreordained before the foundation of the world, but was manifest in these last times for you,

21 Who by him do believe in God, that raised him up from the dead, and gave him glory; that your faith and hope might be in God.

22 Seeing ye have purified your souls in obeying the truth through the Spirit unto unfeigned love of the brethren, see that ye love one another with a pure heart fervently:

23 Being born again, not of corruptible seed, but of incorruptible, by the word of God, which liveth and abideth for ever.

24 For all flesh is as grass, and all the glory of man as the flower of grass. The grass withereth, and the flower thereof falleth away:

25 But the word of the Lord endureth for ever. And this is the word which by the gospel is preached unto you.

This is to be born again, being saved spiritually is the only way we can be saved by the precious shed blood of Jesus Christ. We are still here in the flesh, but we must put off the lusts and temptaions of the flesh, the old man, daily. We must put our fleshly natures to death as it were, and being alive in Jesus Christ our Lord and saviour. We do this in the belief of Him being the Only Begooten Son of God, who was born in the flesh and of a virgin, suffered temptaion though never gave in to it and therefore never sinned. He set an example of how we should live, He was died for us, as the Worthy Lamb of God, to set us free from sin taking the sins of the World on the cross, and he rose again from the dead and is seated at the right hand of the father and will come again in glory to judge the living and the dead and His kingdom shall have no end!

We rely in Him, dwelling in Him and He in us, to guide us by His Holy Spirit in our hearts, thoughts and conduct. We do this is the hope and trust of the life to come, and knowing that at the last trump, after the dead have been raised, we shall be changed in the twinkling of an eye from the corruptible fleshly nature to the incorruptible nature of quickening spirit. (That is, those of us who have put off the corruptible daily and put on the incorruptible daily, not trusting in our own strength and unworthy 'righteousness' but trusting in the Worthy Righteousness of God, and the cleansing power of His blood, and the renewing power of His Holy Spirit, leaning in His Strength, being upheld by His Precious Right Arm, having hope in the life to come and overcoming trial and tribulations.)

Savvy, you then wrote,

'Body and soul are distinct realities, but they are one substance. The Apostles Creed says" We believe in the resurrection of the body.'

I believe your point here is answered by my points preceeeding it, I shall further illustrate this by my agreement with 1 Corinthians 15.

'I hope you don't take offence, but I find the Protestant concept of Jesus only, without a church or the sacraments, like placing mind before matter, or knowledge before existence. We need concrete examples of God's presence in the world. Like I said if God wanted us to live in a spiritual world, he would not have given us bodies, to experience realities of the world.'

Savvy

2:33 PM

Savvy, as Christians we must have fellowship, where possible, with other Christians.

Christians form the Church body. We can and must, however, have a personal relationship, as shown by my previous points above, with Jesus Christ our Lord and Saviour, through obedience and prayer to God. This is achieved both in times of fellowship and in times when there is none besides God with us, such as in a room in our own homes at night.

In light of my previous points, we do not need all of the sacraments dictated by the traditions of Rome, but we need to be baptised in water and baptised by the Holy Spirit, and then we need to abide in Jesus Christ, having a love of the Truth through a living faith borne out by obedience to God.

On the part of your point here '....like placing mind before matter, or knowledge before existence. We need concrete examples of God's presence in the world. Like I said if God wanted us to live in a spiritual world, he would not have given us bodies, to experience realities of the world.'

Please do not lean on your own understanding. For if you cannot understand earthy things how will you understand the things of Heaven? We have physical bodies because we are in a physical world, we are to live spiritually holy because we are in the World but, by the power of Christ Jesus, we are no longer of it. We do not reject the fact that we have bodies and need food to eat, warmth and shelter, and we should not deny this of others either, for we are to tend to both our fellow man's spiritual and bodily needs. We are, however, to trust in God to provide for us, obeying Him, doing good works out of love, through faith that we are saved by Grace and therefore should behave as Christ would have us behave, to others, and such providing for the bodily needs of others is a spiritual act of love and mercy. We must be born again.

God bless you, you did not offend me, I hope I have not offended you in my response.

On a quick note, anyone who denies that Jesus Christ came to Earth REALLY in the flesh and dwelt among us, being tempted yet ALWAYS overcoming temptation, and REALLY dying on the cross, baring the sins of the World upon the cross, and saying 'IT IS FINISHED', and then REALLY rising from the dead, is Anti-Christ and the Spirit of God abides not on such a denier!

A brand of excellent quality often is sacred, but sometimes is very short. Designer Cambridge Satchel also is such a good example. Perhaps this is the reason why the price of this kind of bag only costs as low as $98. People will love it so much.

An administration procedure that works well for Windows 7 Serial Key might not work well for an additional task. Whenever different projects possess different requirements, the process should be transformed accordingly. Otherwise, a decrease in management high quality can lead to a decline within software program quality. The amazing monitoring program might have brand new data choices added as necessary. buy windows 7 ultimate will benefit you a lot it will improve your office work efficiency.

About Me

As an active Michigan lawyer, I practice my profession primarily in Macomb, Oakland and Wayne counties of Michigan, USA (248-253-0333). Sometimes I do work in my old "stomping grounds" of our State Capitol, Lansing, Michigan on administrative, state law related matters, as well. I've enjoyed active and stimulating careers in government, politics, law and as a published and translated author. In the past, I have worked for the Michigan House of Representatives, the Michigan State Senate, and the City of Highland Park, Michigan. I'm the author of the first major critical book about the New Age Movement, THE HIDDEN DANGERS OF THE RAINBOW: The New Age Movement and our Coming Age of Barbarism (1983); A PLANNED DECEPTION: The Staging of a New Age Messiah (1986). Currently, I'm completing a volume about Javier Solana, the Barcelona Process, Israel and the European Union. Email me cumbey@gmail.com.